K.Syed Ali v. The State Rep. By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11.09.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Crl.O.P.No.21467 of 2025 K.Syed Ali ... Petitioner -vsThe State of rep by, The Inspector of Police, Devattipatti Police Station, Salem District.

(Crime No.316 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., / 482 of BNSS Act, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest or his appearance before any Court in connection with the case in Crime No.316 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.C.Harish For Respondent :

Mr.S.Udayakumar, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) ***********

ORDER

The Petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 319(2) BNS and later altered to Sections 126(2), 309(4) and 61(2) of BNS, in Crime No.316 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

1/4

2. The case of prosecution is that the defacto complainant is working as a building contractor and he wanted to purchase a car for his work, and saw the online advertisement of the petitioner. The defacto complainant contacted the petitioner through phone to purchase car. In this regard, the defacto complainant met the petitioner at Vellore to purchase vehicle. On 05.07.2025 the defacto complainant along with his friends went to Krishnagiri in the rental Swift Desire car. Their car was intercepted by 5 persons claiming the to be police officials and they directed the defacto complainant to come out of the car. The driver of the car along with the petitioner escaped from the spot with Rs.11,00,000/- cash. Hence this case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that the properties were recovered by the petitioner and the investigation not yet completed. He would also submit that if he is released on bail, he would hamper the investigation and tamper the witnesses. However, he would vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by both counsel and also considering gravity of offences committed by the petitioner and the fact that the properties were not recovered by the petitioner and the investigation is not yet completed and if he is released on bail, there is possibility of tampering the witnesses and hampering the investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the 2/4

petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 11.09.2025 rna 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 learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Omalur. 2.The Inspector of Police, Devattipatti Police Station, Salem District.

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

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

rna Crl.O.P.No.21467 of 2025 11.09.2025 4/4