Ashokan v. State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 12.06.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Ashokan ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep by Sub Inspector of Police, Nellikuppam Police Station, Cuddalore 607 302.

(Crime No.19 of 2026) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the event of arrest in Crime No.19 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Madasamy For Respondent : Mr.N.Palanivel Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC in Crime No.19 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

1/5

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner joined hands with two other accused who are all Court staff collected a sum of Rs.16 lakhs from the de facto complainant under the pretext of getting employment in the Neyveli Lignite Corporation and subsequently failed to comply with the same and also cheated the de facto complainant. Hence, the case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions.

6. From the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side and the materials available on record, it is seen that this is a case relating 2/5

to alleged job-racketing. According to the prosecution, the petitioner received a sum of Rs.16,00,000/- from the de-facto complainant on the promise of securing employment in Neyveli Lignite Corporation. Admittedly, any appointment in Neyveli Lignite Corporation is a matter of public employment. Therefore, the very act of the de-facto complainant allegedly parting with a sum of Rs.16,00,000/- for securing a public employment prima facie reflects an illegal arrangement between the parties. In such circumstances, this Court is of the firm view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. 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-I, Cuddalore 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 3/5

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., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; (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.

12.06.2026 kv To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-I, Cuddalore.

2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Nellikuppam Police Station, Cuddalore 607 302.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 4/5

C.KUMARAPPAN.J.

kv 12.06.2026 5/5