Manickam v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 22.09.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR Manickam ... Petitioner Vs.

State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Kodumudi Police Station, Erode District.

(Crime No.65 of 2024) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to modify the condition in paragraph No.(b) imposed on the petitioner by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Erode, in Crl.M.P.No.1879 of 2025 vide order dated 14.07.2025 that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) in the court of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kodumudi, Crime No.65 of 2024 on the file of the respondent and the bail bond shall be issued only after such deposit.. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Vijayaragavan For Respondent : Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/4

O R D E R

The Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to modify the condition imposed on the petitioner by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Erode, on 14.07.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.1879 of 2025. 2.

The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner is arrayed as one of the accused in Crime No.65 of 2024 registered for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC. The petitioner filed an application in Crl.M.P.No.1879 of 2025 before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Erode, seeking anticipatory bail. The learned Judge, while granting the anticipatory bail, directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) in the court of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kodumudi. Despite the extension of time granted by the court below, the petitioner is unable to raise the funds to comply with the said condition. Hence, he prayed to modify the said condition. 3.

Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) objects for modifying the condition stating that the petitioner along with another accused, under the guising of taking a JCB Hitachi machine on lease, 2/4

cheated the de facto complainant.

4.

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

5.

In view of the above, considering the nature of the allegation against the petitioner and the objection raised, this Court is not inclined to modify the condition.

6.

Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file a necessary application before the Court below, setting out appropriate reasons for his inability to comply with the order dated 14.07.2025. On filing of such application, the trial Court may consider the same and pass orders on merits. 22.09.2025 ham N. SATHISH KUMAR , J.

3/4

ham To 1.

The Principal Sessions Judge, Erode.

2.

The Inspector of Police, Kodumudi Police Station, Erode District.

2.

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

22.09.2025 4/4