Bhuvaneshwaran v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 28.04.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP No.10821 of 2026 1.Bhuvaneshwaran 2.Gopinath 3.Subramaniyan Raja 4.Ravikumar D 5.Kesavan ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Oragadam Police Station, Kanceepuram District, Crime No.(06/ 2026)
...Respondent(s)
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No 06/ 2026 pending on the file of the respondent. For Petitioner:
Mr.S.Sivakumar For Respondent:
Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 344, 316(4), 306 and 318(4) of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, in Crime No.6 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners, along with other accused, had damaged some materials, namely injectors, Zozzles, and control valves in the de-facto complainant's company, the worth of which is about Rs.4,00,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crores Only) and illegally sold the abovesaid materials. Hence, the case.
3. 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 further submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the de-facto complainant and they were falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the similarly placed coaccused, namely A3 was granted anticipatory bail by this Court on 26.03.2026 in Crl.O.P.No.7723 of 2023 and that the petitioners have no previous cases. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), while opposing the bail application, would submit that there was some huge misappropriation worth about Rs.4,00,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crores Only) and the misappropriation
took place in the month of May 2025. However, only through the audit, they came to know about the misappropriation, and there are fifteen accused; this petitioner is the third accused, and he is a trainee in the above concern. He would, however, submit that the petitioners have no previous cases.
5. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6. Though the learned Government (Crl.Side) has strongly opposed the anticipatory bail application, taking into consideration the unearthing of misappropriation through documentary evidence, that too, through the audit and the occurrence took place on 01.05.2025, this Court is of the firm view that, at this length of time, no custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required and the entire issue can be sorted out through documents and proper enquiry. Therefore, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail subject to certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sriperumpudoor, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a 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: (a) If the petitioners fail to surrender before the concerned 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 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;
(c) The petitioners shall report before the respondent police, twice a day at 10.30 a.m., and 5.30 p.m., for a period of thirty (30) 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 action 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 ata
Copy to:
1. The Judicial Magistrate, Sriperumpudoor.
2. The Inspector of Police, Oragadam Police Station, Kanceepuram District.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
ata CRL OP No. 10821 of 2026 28.04.2026