← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP/13620/2026granted

Mathivanan T v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police

2026-06-03Honourable Mr.Justice C.Kumarappan7 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Mathivanan T S/o. Thanigachalam, Managing Trustee of The Bridge Trust, No. 51-19/10b, Marakadai, Kandhappa Street, Velapadi, Vellore - 632001.

..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep by, The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Chengalpattu District.

(Crime No. 02 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to grant Anticipatory Bail and enlarge the Petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No. 02 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent, and thus render justice.

For Petitioner(s):

M/S. N.Pratiek For Respondent(s):

Mr.N.Palanivel, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 403, 405, 420 and 120B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 in Crime No.2 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the Managing Trustee of Bridge Trust which undertakes CSR activities of the Company. In this connection, the petitioner's trust has entered into Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the defacto complainant's company namely Mobis India Foundation for construction of 50 houses of transgender beneficiaries and in furtherance there of they have completed the construction in the year 2023 itself and such houses are yet to be inaugurated . There were certain defects found by the defacto complainant in furtherance there of and the Bridge Trust had allegedly acted in collusion with Mobis insider Mr.Senthil Rajkumar (A2) Senior General Manager in connection with project execution, resulting in diversion of CSR funds for wrongful gain and misappropriate CSR funds which led to the registration of an FIR. Hence, the present case.

3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the petitioner is the Managing Trustee of the Bridge Trust which undertakes CSR activities of the Company. In this connection, the petitioner's trust has entered into Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the defacto complainant's company namely Mobis India Foundation for construction of 50 houses of trans gender peoples and in furtherance there of they have completed the construction in the year 2023 itself and the aforesaid houses are yet to be inaugurated . There were certain defects found by the defacto complainant in furtherance there of, the present complaint came to be registered. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would oppose the anticipatory bail on the ground that they have yet to receive the expert opinion.

5. I am of the anxious consideration to either side submissions, while looking into the FIR, the entire allegation in respect of construction, complying with sub standard materials and it taken place from 01.03.2021 to 27.01.2023 and the FIR came to be registered only on 06.03.2026. According to the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) that the

expert opinion is yet to be received. And as rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner's counsel in such event, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required in this case and hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:

(a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned 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 surety ship (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 petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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 petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

02-06-2026 Vv To

1. The Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu

2. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Chengalpattu District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

VV 03-06-2026