Kangadaran T, v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.01.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.29659 of 2025 Kangadaran T ... Petitioner Vs.
The State rep. By, The Inspector of Police, CBCID-Perambalur Police Station, Perambalur District.
... Respondent (Crime No.3 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita of BNS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.3 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Vignesh Kumar for Mr.Mohammed Dharwish For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana, Government Advocate (Crl. Side).
O R D E R
The petitioner, who was apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 465, 468, 471 of IPC and Sections 3 & 5 of Emblems & name (Prev. of Improper Use) Act, 1950 in Crime No.3 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/6
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant namely one Mutharasan is an agriculturist who gave the complaint before the respondent police alleged that one Aadhimoolam/A2 is a BJP District Level Officer in Perambalur in the year 2013 and the defacto complainant is a member in the BJP Party and A2 was dishonestly induced and false promise made to the defacto complainant if Rs.1,00,000/- is invested to the trust and they have returned back Rs.1 Crore within 3 or 4 months and thereby the defacto complainant paid Rs.3,00,000/- to A2 on 03.03.2013 in front of Pachaiamman Temple, Keelapuliyur and then the defacto complainant demanded money to A2 and it was replied that the entire money was given to A1.
It is further alleged that A1 who is the kingpin of the entire scam in the name and style of Savarimuthu Aruldoss Memorial Trust misused the RBI Emblems and names for the purpose of cheating the several crores of money from the common innocents, victims including the defacto complainants based on the conspiracy between A1 to A8, which leading to the case of registration against the petitioner. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that totally eight accused are involved in this case and the petitioner is arrayed as A7. The petitioner is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.29995 of 2025 dated 20.11.2025. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that total amount involved in this case is Rs.40.56 crores and the petitioner in this case collected a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- from the defacto complainant, apart from that more amounts were collected from various persons and the investigation is still pending. He further submitted that the co-accused, who have already been granted bail, were not aware of the transactions. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the materials available on record.
3/6
K.RAJASEKAR.J.
kmm
6. Considering the fact that the case involves a huge amount of Rs.40.56/- crores and that the petitioner has also collected a sum Rs.15,00,000/- and no amount has been recovered so far, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 07.01.2026 kmm To
1. The Inspector of Police, CBCID-Perambalur Police Station, Perambalur District.
2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
Crl.O.P.No.29659 of 2025 4/6