Navyraj v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16-10-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Navyraj Petitioner Vs The State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Cheyyar Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

Crime No.359/2025 Respondent PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of apprehending arrest in Crime No. 359 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Parthiban For Respondent:

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

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest by the respondent

police for the alleged offences punishable under Section 318(4) of BNS in Crime No.359 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The allegation against the petitioner, who is ranked as A3, is that the defacto complainant used to borrow money from A1's father. During those transactions, the complainant had given 88 blank cheques and 100 promissory notes, which were in the possession of A1's father and after his death, instead of handing over the cheques and promissory notes to the defacto complainant, the petitioner along with other accused persons misused the same. It is further alleged that the accused encashed the cheques, threatened the defacto complainant to repay the money and also initiated legal proceedings against him. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is only a friend of A1 and has no knowledge about the alleged transactions involved in the present case. He further submitted that the petitioner had issued a cheque

for a sum of Rs.5 lakhs to the defacto complainant, and when the same was presented, it was dishonoured. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent police reteirated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner along with other accused persons had misued the blank cheques and promissory notes belonging to the defacto complainant and initiated false proceedings to extort money. He further submitted that the investigation is at initial stage and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary to recover the documents. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

5.

Learned counsel for the intervener would submit that the cheque was misused by A1, in collusion with other accused persons and after dishonour of the cheque, they also filed cheque

bounce cases in various jurisdictions with an intention to harass the defacto complainant. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) and perused the materials available on record.

7. It is admitted by the defacto complainant that he handover the blank cheque and promissory notes to A1's father and the same was misused by A3 in collusion with other accused, since the custodial interrogation is not required for the purpose of investigating this case, hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

8. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Cheyyar, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for

a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only), with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

(a) the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity; (b) 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;

(c) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(d) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(e) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the

petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; and;

(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 16-10-2025 drl To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar.

2.The Inspector of Police, Cheyyar Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

drl 16.10.2025