Kanniappan G v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 09.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL.O.P.No.33643 of 2025 Kanniyappan .. Petitioner

Versus

The State rep by its, The Inspector of Police, EOW, Kancheepuram, Kancheepuram.

(Crime No.03 of 2021) .. Respondent Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.03 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner :

Mr.Prakash Adiapadam For Respondent :

M/s.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 of IPC and Section 5 of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interest Depositors (In Financial Establishment) Act, 1997 in Crime No.03 of 2021 seeks anticipatory bail. 1/4

2.The allegation against the petitioner is that he joined hands with other accused, was involved in running an unregistered chit scheme in which the defacto complainant subscribed and paid Rs.1,000/- per month from 07.01.2012 to 13.05.2017, totalling Rs.65,000/-. After completion of the chit, the amount was not repaid to the defacto complainant. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the co-accused was released on bail by this Court in Crl.OP.No.4822 of 2023 dated 03.03.2023. He further submitted that the petitioner did not benefit from the amount collected from A2 in this case and hence he prayed for grant of 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 investigation is completed and the final report filed and the same was taken cognizance in C.C.No.32 of 2025 by the TANPID Court, Chennai and summons was issued to the petitioner for the appearance at the hearing on 17.12.2025. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) and perused the materials available on record.

2/4

6. Considering the fact that the Trial Court has taken cognizance and summons was also issued, there is no apprehension of arrest. The petitioner is directed to appear before the trial Court on receiving summons. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. 09.12.2025 drl To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kancheepuram.

2. The Inspector of Police, EOW, Kancheepuram, Kancheepuram.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

3/4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

drl CRL.O.P.No.33643 of 2025 09.12.2025 4/4