S.Saravanan v. State Rep. By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 13-05-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

1. S.Saravanan S/o,Sengottaian, Director, M/s. Hillard Pharmaceuticals India Ltd.,

2. Kiruthika W/o.S.Saravanan, Sleeping Director, M/s.Hilord Pharmaceuticals India Ltd., Both are residing at No.18, Sai Brindhavan Nagar, Paarai Thottam, Chinnamuthalaipatty, Namakkal-1.

..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Namakkal Police Station, Namakkal District.

(Crime No.121 of 2026).

..Respondent(s) PRAYER : To enlarge the Petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest by the Respondent Police pending investigation in Crime No.0386 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.S.Panneerselvan For Respondent(s):

Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 421, 465 and 503 of IPC in connection with the case in Crime No.121 of 2026, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners on the pretext of arranging a dealership with a private limited company, induced the defacto complainant to deposit a sum of Rs.35 lakhs and since the defacto complainant did not have sufficient funds to make the payment, the petitioners persuaded the defacto complainant to hand over his original property documents for the purpose of mobilizing funds. However, bu using those original documents, the petitioners allegedly obtained a loan of Rs.1.19 crores without the knowledge of the defacto complainant and subsequently defaulted, which resulted in SARFAESI proceedings. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case and that the custodial interrogation is not required in this case and hence prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions, would submit that investigation is pending, however, there is no previous case against the petitioners and hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side, nature of offences the alleged occurrence took place in the year 2017 and gave report before the respondent police on 28.03.2024 and the FIR was lodged on 05.08.2025, by this time the material part of investigation might have been completed and no previous case is pending against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners on certain conditions.

7. 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 of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Namakkal, on condition that 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 respondent Police or the Police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned,

failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further conditions that:

[a] the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity. [b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police for a period of thirty days at 10.30 a.m. and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

[c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[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 petitioners 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.

13-05-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order

MTL/SSB 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 the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To

1. The learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Namakkal.

2. The Inspector of Police, Namakkal Police Station, Namakkal District.

(Crime No.121 of 2026).

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

P.DHANABAL, J.

MTL/SSB 13-05-2026