S.Nagarajan @ Balasubramaniam v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 24.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.23998 of 2025 and Crl.MP.No.17635 of 2025 S.Nagarajan @ Balasubramaniam ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep by The Inspector of Police, K-6, T.P.Chatram Police Station, Chennai-600 030.

... Respondent (Cr.No.200 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/accused in the event of arrest by the respondent police in Cr.No.200 of 2025 pending investigation before the respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr.Durai Kannan Durai For Intervenor : No Appearance For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/5

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 406 and 420 of BNS in Cr.No.200 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, in collusion with the other accused, collected a sum of Rs.27,00,000/- from seven victims by promising to secure employment for them in the Railways. Hence, the present case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had only introduced the other accused to the victims for the purpose of assisting them and that he had not collected any money. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed that anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioner.

2/5

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner herein has been arrayed as A1, who is main accused in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner, along with the other accused, had collected a sum of Rs.27,00,000/- from seven victims. He also submitted that the investigation is still pending. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Considering the fact that a huge amount has been collected by the petitioner, and that if he is released on anticipatory bail, there is a likelihood of his hampering with the investigation, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 24.10.2025 Vv 3/5

To

1. The V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.

2.The The Inspector of Police, K-6, T.P.Chatram Police Station, Chennai-600 030.

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

4/5

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

Vv Crl.O.P.No.23998 of 2025 24.10.2025 5/5