Manoharan v. State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 07.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.22213 of 2025 E.Manoharan ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep. by Inspector of Police, S-1 St.Thomas Mount Police Station St.Thomas Mount ... Respondent (Cr.No.147 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in Cr.No.147 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Sugumar For Respondent : Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence under Section 316(4), 318(2) of BNSS & Sec.66D of Information Technology Act in Crime No.147 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was working 1/4

as a Senior Manager Operations in the Company namely Trending Consol Services Private Limited in the year 2024, while working, he made some personal transactions approximately to the tune of Rs.30 lakhs. It was further alleged that the petitioner has misused the company ID for doing some illegal transport services by colluding with few other transport companies. Hence, the case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner is a Senior Manager, it is his duty to clear various goods and most of the time when there is scarcity of operators, he engage various private operators and paying additional amount. He further submitted that he was able to carry out regular activities and thereby caused additional expenses to the company and earned income to the extent of nearly about Rs.25 lakhs. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case and reported that they have served summons to the petitioner and he has also appeared and gave a statement and in the statement it revealed that the petitioner herein has involved in illegal 2/4

transport business and caused loss to the company to the extent of nearly Rs.25 lakhs. He further submitted that investigation in this case is still pending. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the fact that the petitioner who was working as an Operational Manger, involved in illegal transport service business and obtained benefits to the huge extent, this Court is of the view that granting anticipatory bail at this stage, would tamper the investigation, hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 07.10.2025 ssi To 1.The Inspector of Police, S-1 St.Thomas Mount Police Station, St.Thomas Mount.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

3/4

ssi Crl.O.P.No.22213 of 2025 07.10.2025 4/4