Mr.N.K.Mani Maran Krishnasamy -A1 v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 14-07-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN 1.N.K.Mani Maran Krishnasamy 2.P.Sathish Kumar Petitioners Vs The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, C-2 Elephant gate police station George town Chennai 600 108 Respondent PRAYER This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioners in the event of their arrest by the respondent police in Crime Number 240 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the Respondent Police.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Mohanraj S For Respondent(s):

Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Govt Advocate (Crl Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 316 (5) and 318 (4) of BNS

Act, 2023, in Crime No.240 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The prosecution alleges that the complainant, Mole Singh, gave Rs.8,00,000/- each to the accused (A1, an ICF Railway staff member and A2, a YES Bank staff member) purportedly as a friendly transaction. However, the complainant subsequently lodged a complaint, resulting in an FIR and the freezing of the accused's bank accounts. Hence, the case. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners is ready and willing to furnish substantial sureties for their due release and abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court and therefore, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that there are totally two accused in this case and the petitioners are arrayed as A1 and A2. He would further submit that the petitioners have borrowed a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- each from the defacto

complainant and failed to repay the same. He also submitted that investigation is at crucial stage, if the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail at this stage, then there will be possibility of tampering the witnesses, abscondance and hampering of investigation. Hence, he raised strong objection for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, gravity of offence and the stage of investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed.

14-07-2025 gbi Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

To 1.The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, C-2 Elephant gate police station George town Chennai 600 108 2.The Metropolitan Magistrate-VII, George Town Court.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN J.

gbi CRL OP No. 15369 of 14-07-2025