P.Ravi v. The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.01.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR 1.P.Ravi
2. C.Ananthi ... Petitioners/A2 & A3 in Crl.O.P.No.31263 of 2025 Prashanth ... Petitioner/A4 in Crl.O.P.No.34803 of 2025y Vs.
State By, Represented by The Inspector of Police, Vellakovil Police Station, Tiruppur.
Crime No.420 of 2025.
... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.420 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.
In Crl.O.P.No.31263 of 2025 For Petitioners :
Mr.Venkateswaran Kanniappan For Respondent :
M/s.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For Intervenor : Mr.M.Santhanaraman
In Crl.O.P.No.34803 of 2025 For Petitioners :
Mr.K.Govi Ganesan For Respondent :
M/s.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
O R D E R
The petitioners herein apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 125, 409, 465, 470 and 506(1) of IPC in Crime No.420 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the defacto complainant was having a land to the extent of 3 1⁄2 cents and had come forward to avail a loan and accused A2 to A4 approached the defacto complainant and promised her that they would arrange loan to the extent of Rs.25 lakhs with the help of A1 in this case and also collected sale deed from her and thereafter they have introduced A1 and he had also promised that he would arrange loan and accordingly documents were also executed by the defacto complainant and several documents were also obtained. When the defacto complainant queried about the disbursement of loan, it was informed by A2 that he would get back the same and returned back the same and surprisingly, SARFESI
notice was served on her stating that the loan was disbursed to the extent of Rs.25 lakhs and thereafter it revealed that the 4th accused has collected the money and he has also sold some of the properties. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in Crl.O.P.No. 31263 of 2025 submitted that these petitioners have only assisted the defacto complainant for availing the loan and she inturn executed various documents in the bank and based on the same, loans were disbursed and petitioners were not benefitted from the transactions. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.34803 of 2025 submitted that, since the defacto complainant was not having the sufficient cibil score for getting the loan, A4 has comeforward to assist the defacto complainant and after the loan was availed by the company run by A4, funds were once again disbursed to the defacto complainant and hence there is no misappropriation. Hence, he prays for grant for grant of bail to the petitioner.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that investigation revealed that, Rs.20 lakhs loan was availed by using the documents of the defacto complainant, however the loan was disbursed to the account of A4 and submitted that investigation in this case is pending.
6. I have gone through the materials placed on record.
7. On perusal of the FIR, it revealed that, A2 and A4 have promised the defacto complainant that they would arrange loan of Rs.25 lakhs and making false promise obtained MoD and other documents and she has been cheated by the petitioners. Hence, I am of the view that, A2 and A4 have actively participated in the offene and also cheated the defacto by pledging her property in the bank and failed to repay the loan, which resulted in initiation of recovery proceedings. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to A2 and A4 and petitions filed by them is dismissed. However, considering the limited allegations against A3, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to A3.
8. Accordingly, the A3/petitioner No.2 in Crl.O.P.No.31263 of 2025 ( C.Ananthi) is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their
appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kangeyam on condition that the petitioner/A3 shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen 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/A3 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/A3 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;
[d] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner/A3 in
accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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)13 SCC 283];
[e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 29.01.2026 sma To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Kangeyam 2.The Inspector of Police, Vellakovil Police Station, Tiruppur.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
K.RAJASEKAR, J.
sma Crl.O.P.Nos. 31263 & 34803of 2025 29.01.2026