M.T. Bellan v. State Represented By The Sub Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.10486 of 2026 1.M.T.Bellan 2.N.M.Gayathri ... Petitioner(s) Vs.

State represented by, The Sub Inspector of Police, E2 Peelamedu Police Station, Coimbatore District.

Crime No.841 of 2025 ... Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023 to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.841 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.A.Anbharasu For Respondent(s) : Mr.P.Dhileepan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the alleged offence under Section 406 of IPC (corresponding to Section 316 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) in Crime No.841 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 1/6

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners, pleading innocence on the part of the petitioners and false implication in the case, seeks the indulgence of this Court. He would submit that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the alleged occurrence had taken place during the years 2012 and 2016, whereas the FIR came to be registered only on 24.12.2025, after an inrodianate delay. He would also submit that the first accused has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 15.04.2026 in Crl.O.P.No.9224 of 2026, and hence, on the ground of parity, the petitioners may also be granted anticipatory bail.

3. The case of the prosecution, as put forth by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, opposing the grant of anticipatory bail, is that the petitioners, along with other accused, had allegedly misused the credit card of the defacto complainant and spent a sum of about Rs.18.48 lakhs, and failed to repay the said amount. It is further alleged that the petitioners are relatives of the defacto complainant.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record.

5. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of 2/6

allegations, the inordinate delay between the period of occurrence and the registration of the FIR, and also the fact that the co-accused has already been granted anticipatory bail, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, as custodial interrogation is not required at this stage.

6. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Coimbatore, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each, with two sureties, each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions that: (a) If the petitioners fail to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

(b) The petitioners and sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for suretyship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity; 3/6

(c) The petitioners shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.00 a.m., for a period of 15 days and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; (d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

28.04.2026 skr 4/6

To

1. The learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Coimbatore

2. The Inspector of Police, E2 Peelamedu Police Station, Coimbatore District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras 5/6

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

skr Crl.O.P.No.10486 of 2026 28.04.2026 6/6