J.K.Daniel Aruldass v. State By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 23.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.18535 of 2025 J.K.Daniel Aruldass ... Petitioner Vs.

State by Inspector of Police, T-2, Chromepet Police Station, Chengalpattu District.

... Respondent (Crime No.228 of 2023) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of her arrest by the respondent police in Crime No.228 of 2023 pending on the file of the Inspector of Police, T-2, Chromepet Police Station, Chengalpattu District.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Sudharsan For Respondent : Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC in 1/4

Crime No.228 of 2023, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioners along with other accused, in order to secure MBBS seat to the defacto complainant's son, have received totally a sum of Rs.66,00,000/- from the defacto complainant and thereafter, they neither secure any MBBS seat nore return the money. Hence, the present case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He also submitted that the subject matter of the amount is Rs.66,00,000/-, out of which, Rs.15,00,000/- has been paid to the defacto complainant . He further submitted that petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed that anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that, the petitioner's earlier anticipatory bail petition was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 21.02.2024 in Crl.OP.No.27874 of 2023 on the ground that the petitioner along with other accused have cheated the defacto 2/4

complainant to the tune of Rs.66,00,000/-, out of which Rs.15,00,000/- have been repaid. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, there is no change of circumstances after the dismissal of the petitioner's earlier anticipatory bail petition and in this regard the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 23.09.2025 Vv To

1. The Inspector of Police, T-2, Chromepet Police Station, Chengalpattu District.

2.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.

3/4

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

Vv Crl.O.P.No.18535 of 2025 23.09.2025 4/4

5/4