S.M. Zahir Ali v. State Rep By Its Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15-10-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR S.M.Zahir Ali .... Petitioners/A1 Vs The State Rep. By its, The Inspector of Police, CCB-1, Chennai.

(Crime No.126 of 2025) ....Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest by the respondent Police concerned in Crime No.126 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.Sreedhar Ramanathan For Respondent :Mr.S.Udayakumar, Government Advocate (Crl.side) ***********

O R D E R

The petitioner herein apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for offences punishable under Sections 61(2), r/w 318(4), 336(2), 338, 336(3) and 340(2) of BNS, in Crime No.126 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, and therefore seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, who is the first accused, along with one Kumutha Krishnan, approached HDFC Bank Ltd., Chennai, seeking a loan to purchase commercial equipment (ACE Mobile Crane) worth about Rs.60,00,000/-. However, no such dealer in the name of IVR Enterprises existed. The accused defrauded the bank by producing fake work orders and availed themselves of a loan of ?60,00,000/-, which was subsequently shared among them. Hence, the present case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that some of the co-accused have already been arrested and released on bail with certain conditions. Hence, he prays for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that the petitioner is the borrower who received Rs.60,00,000/- and cheated the bank. He further submitted that the amount has not been fully recovered so far. He therefore opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the fact that the amount is yet to be fully recovered and that the petitioner is the main accused (borrower), and taking into account the need for further investigation regarding similar activities, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

15-10-2025 nvi To

1. The Additional Court for Exclusive Trial of CCB Cases, Egmore (Metropolita Magistrate), Chennai.

2. The Inspector of Police, CCB-1,Chennai.

3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR, J., nvi 15.10.2025