Pragadeesh v. The State Of Tamilnadu Reptd. By Its Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11.11.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Pragadeesh ... Petitioner -vsState Rep by, The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Ariyalur.

(Crime No.10 of 2025) ... Respondent Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.10 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.G.Prabaharan For Respondent :

Mr.A.Gopinath, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) ********** 1/4

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.09.2025, for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 318(4) and 61(2) of BNS 2023 in Crime No.10 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.The allegation against the petitioner is that he joined hands with two other accused, conspired, and colluded, and induced the de facto complainant to pay a sum of Rs. 12,10,000/- for obtaining stamp papers, for availing a loan, and for documentation to the extent of Rs.6 crores. Similarly, they have also collected Rs. 5,10,000/- from another victim. In total, they have collected Rs. 17,20,000/- pretending themselves that they are having connections with the treasury and other government officials, and subsequently cheated the de facto complainant and another victim.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ranked as A2 and has not colluded with the other accused. He has been falsely implicated in this case, and even in the statement recorded from A1, it is revealed that he has received only Rs. 1 lakh. He is in custody from 21.09.2025. 2/4

Hence, prays for grant bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) reported that investigation in this case has just started, and all the three accused were arrested on 21.09.2025. So far, no amount has been recovered, and if the petitioner is granted bail, it would hamper the investigation. Hence opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the manner in which the occurrence had taken place and the fact that all the accused have cheated the de facto complainant by doing various con-acts, I am of the view that granting bail would hamper the investigation. Hence, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. 11.11.2025 mpa To 1.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Ariyalur.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

3/4

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

mpa 11.11.2025 4/4