Murali v. The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17.11.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Murali ... Petitioner -vsState Rep by, The Inspector of Police, MangalamPolice Station, Tiruppur District.

(Crime No.151 of 2025) ... Respondent Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.151 of 2025 pending investigation on the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Rogith For Respondent :

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

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 30.09.2025, for the alleged offence punishable under Section 316(2) of BNS, in 1/4

Crime No.151 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The allegation against this petitioner is that, this petitioner is on the pretext of running a car rental business, induced the defacto complainant to provide profit and obtained 8 cars in the name of defacto complainant and misappropriated the money. Further investigation revealed that the petitioner herein has cheated nearly 60 victims to the extent of Rs.2,00,00,000/-. Hence this case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is alleged that 8 cars was purchased by the petitioner, however, it is in the name of the defacto complainant, since there is no profit, the loan amounts were not repaid and that entire transaction is only business transaction. He would further submit that the petitioner was arrested and he is in judicial custody from 30.09.2025 and is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution's case and reported that at the outset it will looks like a business transaction between the parties, that the investigation revealed that totally 60 persons have been cheated by this petitioner on the premises that he will arrange the loan for the vehicle and run the cars and give 2/4

profits to them. However, by using the loan he siphoned of the money to the extent of nearly Rs.2,00,00,000/-. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the First Information Report.

6. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel on either side, that huge amount has been siphoned of by the petitioner herein and it is also stated that out of 24 cars only 9 cars were recovered and investigation is pending, if the petitioner is granted bail he will hamper the investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 17.11.2025 rna To 1.The Inspector of Police, MangalamPolice Station, Tiruppur District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

3/4

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

rna 17.11.2025 4/4