Kanmani v. The State Rep. By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 14.05.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE.P.DHANABAL CRL.O.P.No.11568 of 2026

1. Kanmani W/o.Late.Muthukumar

2. T.M.Dinesh Kumar, S/o.Late Muthukumar ..Petitioners Vs The State represented by:

The Inspector of Police, Annathanpatty Police Station, Salem City.

(Crime No.160 of 2026) .... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.160 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.K.V.Muthuvisakan For Respondent : Mr.S.Balaji Government Advocate (Crl.Side) *****

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 316, 318 1/6

and 351 of BNS, in connection with Cr.No.160 of 2026, seek anticipatory bail.

The case of the prosecution is that during April 2024, the petitioners approached the defacto complainant and induced him to invest in a cryptocurrency scheme by assuring high returns. Believing their words, the defacto complainant invested huge amount and the petitioners issued a cheque towards the returns, but issued stop payment to those cheques and thereby cheated the defacto complainant. Hence, a case was registered in Cr.No.160/2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 316, 318 and 351 of BNS.

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the dispute is purely civil in nature and the defacto complainant given criminal colour to the civil dispute. He would further submit that the first petitioner, being a senior citizen suffering age-related ailments. Further part of the amount has already been paid to the defacto complainant. Hence, the learned counsel seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 2/6

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that there is money dispute between the parties and the defacto complainant was cheated by the petitioners herein. Hence he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the submission made on either side, the nature of offence and the fact that already the petitioners paid part of the amount to the defacto complainant and also the fact that the dispute between the parties seems to be civil in nature, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions. 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 made ready, before the Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Salem, on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent-police 3/6

every Saturday for a period of eight weeks.

[b] the petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

[c] the petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] 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 petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.

14.05.2026 cgi 4/6

Note:-

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the official website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in official website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To

1. The Inspector of Police, Annathanpatty Police Station, Salem City. 2.The Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Salem.

3. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

5/6

P.DHANABAL, J., cgi 06.

CRL.O.P.No.11568 of 2026 14.05.2026 6/6