P.Tamilarasi v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Represented By, Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 20.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.31050 of 2025

1. P.Tamilarasi

2. P.Sasikala ... Petitioners Vs.

The State of Tamilnadu Represented by Inspector of Police, Sankari Police Station, Salem.

... Respondent (Cr.No.476 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners in the event of their arrest by the respondent in Cr.No.476 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.Esakkiappan A.M For Intervenor : Mr.M.Lokeshwaran For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/6

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 420 of IPC/ 318 of BNS, in Crime No.476 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners have borrowed goods worth about Rs.1.86crores and subsequently, failed to pay the money for the value of goods supplied. Subsequently, a case was registered against them. Hence, the present case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the defacto complainant has given a complaint, which is completely civil in nature and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted they are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

2/6

4. The learned counsel for the Intervenor submitted that the petitioners herein has involved in similar line of business as run by the defacto complainant. They have collected various goods and failed to return back the money and from the in caption itself collected the goods and misappropriated to the tune of Rs.1,86,00,712/- Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and reported that FIR was registered only recently and the investigation is going on and all the accused were absconding. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

7. Considering the submissions and perusal of records revealed that admittedly it is case of supply of goods and non payment of money for the goods supplied, I am of the view that for investigating the case of this nature, custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not required. Hence, I 3/6

am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.

8. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy made, before the Judicial Magistrate Court-I, Sankari on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute separate bonds for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition that:

(a) If the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) 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, 4/6

2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity; (c) The petitioners shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; (e)If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

20.11.2025 Vv 5/6

To

1. The Judicial Magistrate Court-I, Sankari

2. The Inspector of Police, Sankari Police Station, Salem.

3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.

6/6

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

Vv 7/6

Crl.O.P.No.31050 of 2025 20.11.2025 8/6