Vidhuraksivam v. The State Rep By .The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN C.Vidhuraksivam ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State rep by The Inspector of Police Bagayam Police Station, Vellore District.

(Crime No. 102 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS, pleased to enlarge the Petitioner on Anticipatory Bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.102 of 2026 pending investigation on file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner(s):

M/S. M.Kalaiyarasan For Respondent(s):

M/s.R.S.Indira, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) Mr.R.Krishnan for Intervenor

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 336 (2), 336 (3), 316 (2), 318 (2), 318 (4) and 351 (3) of BNS, in Crime No.102 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto-complainant and the petitioner were running a partnership business under the name and style of M/s.Luru and Chic in Bagayam, Vellore. It is alleged that the petitioner created forged documents and cheated the defacto-complainant out of a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and is ready to co-operate for investigation. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that the petitioner and the defacto-complainant had started a partnership business under the name and style of M/s.Luru and Chic. He further submitted that the money invested in the said concern was diverted by the petitioner to start a new company, and that the petitioner also misused the signature of the defacto-complainant to obtain a loan.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and strongly opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Considering the totality of the circumstances, including the registration of the First Information Report on 23.03.2026 and the business dealings between the petitioner and the defacto-complainant, this Court is of the firm view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to 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 (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Vellore, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five 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 Morning at 10.30 am and Evening at 5.30 pm. 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];

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

(e) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

10-06-2026 (2/2) ep To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Vellore.

2.The Inspector of Police Bagayam Police Station, Vellore District.

3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.