Shanmugam v. State Rep. By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26-09-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Shanmugam S/o.Kannan, Bandharahalli Village and Post, Karimangalam Taluk, Dharmapuri District -635 123.
Petitioner(s) Vs State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Krishnagiri Police Station, Krishnagiri District.
(Crime No.10 of 2022).
Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, Act, 2023 praying to enlarge the petitioner in the event of his arrest by the respondent police in pursuant to the FIR in Crime No. 10 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner(s): Annagandhi Ramasamy For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate [Criminal Side]
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 463, 465, 468, 471 and 420 of IPC in Crime No. 10 of 2022 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was 1/6
working as Tahsildar in SIDCO. He had collected to the tune of Rs.78,74,000/- from the de-facto complainant and others under the guise of getting job of Office Assistant in various Government Departments. Thereafter, he had issued fake appointment order to the de-facto complainant and others. Hence the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He also submits that the co-accused had granted anticipatory bail in Crl.O.P.No. 19977 of 2023 dated 04.09.2023. He also submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to furnish sufficient solvent sureties for his release. 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 submits that the petitioner was working as Tahsildar at Hosur in SIDCO, Krishnagiri District from the year 2017 to 2019. At that time, the petitioner along with A1, A2 2/6
and A4 had had lured the public by stating that they would secure job in Government Departments and collected to the tune of Rs.78,74,000/- from 27 victims and thereafter, the petitioner and others had cheated the de-facto complainant and 27 victims. He further submits that co-accused had already granted anticipatory bail dated 04.09.2023 in Crl.O.P.No. 19977 of 2023 and final report also filed in this case. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by learned counsels on either side and considering the nature of allegations against the petitioner and considering the fact that investigation has been completed, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with 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 days from the 3/6
date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Krishnagiri, 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 condition that:
(a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order 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 the identity 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;
4/6
[d] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court themselves as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];
[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 26.09.2025 MSM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Krishnagiri.
2. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Krishnagiri Police Station, Krishnagiri District. (Crime No.10 of 2022).
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 5/6
K.RAJASEKAR , J.
MSM 26.09.2025 6/6