Vignesh v. The 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 Vignesh S/o. Raman, No.56A, Cross Street, Seelapanthal, Kolakaravadi, Tiruavannamalai District, ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State rep by The Inspector of Police, Tambaram Police Station, Chengalpattu District, Cr. No.543/2025 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS Act, 2025 to enlarge the Petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event his arrest by the respondent in Cr. No. 543 of 2025 on the file of the respondent herein and thus render justice.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.G.Mageshkumar For Respondent(s):

Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 61(2), 318(4), 336(2), 336(3) of BNSS Act, 2023 (120B, 420, 465, 468 of IPC) in connection with the case in

Crime No.543 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the Accused 1 and 2 got vehicle loan to the tune of Rs.10,25,000/- and purchased Innova Car and there is an hypothecation agreement A1, A2 and the defacto complainant and they forged a NOC so as to get another loan and got the same by forging such NOC. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner/A4 is only an ex-employee of the defacto complainant and he has 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 petitioner.

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 petitioner and hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and considering the nature of offences, even according to the prosecution case the occurrence took place on 28.01.2025 and the FIR was registered on 06.12.2025 so far no steps have been taken by the respondent police in securing the petitioner and there is no previous case pending against the petitioner and in that case already bail was granted to the co-accused, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his 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, Tambaram on condition that the petitioner 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 petitioner 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

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

[d] the petitioner 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 petitioner 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.

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.

p To

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tambaram

2. The The Inspector of Police, Tambaram Police Station, Chengalpattu District, Cr. No.543/2025 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

P.DHANABAL, J.

MTL 13-05-2026