Puthuselvam I v. The State, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11-07-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR Puthuselvam I Petitioner Vs The State, The Inspector of Police Villupuram CCD II Police Station, Villupuram. Respondent PRAYER This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in event of arrest in Crime No. 13 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner:

Mr.S.Vellidoss For Respondent:

Mr.R.Vinothraja, GA (Crl.side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 31.03.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) of BNS r/w 66 D I.T Act, in connection with Crime No.13 of 2025, registered on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution stems from a complaint filed by the defacto complainant, the proprietor of Ganesh Jewellery, who had registered on the Mudaliyar Shaadi, matrimonial website in pursuit of a life partner. A lady expressed interest in him, and during their conversation, she proposed a plan to enhance their financial status together and she persuaded him to download a specific trading app, promising substantial profits from minimal investments. Trusting her assurances, Ganesh made payments totalling Rs.84,43,500/- in 16 instalments via bank transfers and G-Pay. However, she reneged on her promises, failed to return the funds, and cheated him. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 31.03.2025. It is contended that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is a friend of the accused, and merely acted as a conduit, receiving the amount sent by the complainant into his account and

subsequently handing it over to the accused. The petitioner asserts that he has no involvement in the alleged offense and he would neither abscond nor tamper any witnesses. He, therefore, prayed that bail be granted.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing for grant of bail to the petitioner, reiterated the prosecution case.

5. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted without prejudice to his rights and the defence, the petitioner is ready to deposit a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to the credit of the Crime No.13 of 2025.

6. Considering the nature of allegations and the submission that the petitioner is willing to deposit an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- to the credit of Crime No.13 of 2025, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on

executing his bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Villupuram and on further conditions that:

[a] 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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only) to the credit of Crime No.13 of 2025 and shall produce the proof of payment before the learned Magistrate concerned at the time of executing the sureties. The learned concerned Magistrate shall deposit the same in the interest bearing fixed deposit scheme in any one of the nationalized banks. [c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [d] the petitioner shall make themselves available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required; [e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de-facto complainant and witnesses;

[f] the petitioner to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard; [g] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283]; [h] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

11-07-2025 jai Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

Note :

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To 1.The State, The Inspector of Police Villupuram CCD II Police Station, Villupuram.

2.The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Villupuram.

3.The District jail, Villupuram.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.

jai CRL OP No. 19241 of 11-07-2025