J Tamilkumar v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :23.06.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL.OP.No.16838 of 2025 J.Tamilkumar ...Petitioner/A3 Vs.

The Inspector of Police F1 Chintadaripet Police Station, Chennai (Cr.No.144 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in Cr.No.144 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For petitioner :

Mr.D.Baskar For Respondent :

Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC in Crime No. 144 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner on the false promise of securing allotment of house in Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board, had 1/4

received money from the defacto complainant and cheated him. Hence, the complaint.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that he is in no way connected with the alleged offence. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there are totally three accused. The petitioner is A3. The first accused was already arrested and released on bail. He further submitted that the petitioner on the false promise of securing a house allotment in the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board, had received Rs.9,80,000/- from four victims and all the petitioners shared the commission among themselves. Hence he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

2/4

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made on either side and since the petitioner conspired with other accused received Rs.9,80,000/- from four victims, and neither allotted any house nor repaid the said amount to the victims and thus committed serious offence, which very much requires custodial interrogation of the petitioner, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

23.06.2025 gv 1.The Inspector of Police F1 Chintadaripet Police Station, Chennai

2. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.

3/4

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN.,J gv CRL.OP.No.16838 of 2025 23.06.2025 4/4