Rohith v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep.By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.34473 of 2025 Rohith ... Petitioner Vs.

The State of Tamilnadu Rep by the Inspector of Police, Avadi Police Station, Chennai.

... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.317 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.Mohan Raj Chandra Sekaran For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 406, 420, 294(b) and 506(1) of IPC in Cr.No.317 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/5

2. The prosecution case is that the petitioner had joined hands with other accused collected a sum of Rs.27.10 lakhs from the defacto complainant under the pretext of supplying the vehicles, however he had failed to honour the same and also return back the money, which led to the registration of an FIR. Hence, the present case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ranked as A2 and son of A1 and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not received any money, hence prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner is A2 and he has been actively involved in this case. He further submitted that investigation is pending. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 2/5

6. Considering the fact that A1 in this case was arrested and released on bail and it is alleged that the petitioner is the son of A1 and the majority of allegations as against A1 in this case and some of the properties have been recovered, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions:

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy made, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Poonamalle on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond 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 petitioner 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, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity; 3/5

(c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent police on all working days 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 aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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.

17.12.2025 Vv To

1. The Judicial Magistrate-II, Poonamalle

2. The Inspector of Police, Avadi Police Station, Chennai.

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

4/5

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

Vv K.RAJASEKAR , J.

Crl.O.P.No.34473 of 2025 17.12.2025 5/5