E Anbazhagan v. State By, Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 05-01-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. E Anbazhagan S/o.Ealugundan, Nariyanahalli Village, Indira Nagar, Palacodu, Dharmapuri - 636 809.

Petitioner(s) Vs

1. State by, Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Salem District.

Cr.No.13/2025.

Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police concerned in offence under the sections 120B, 406,417,420,468,471 of IPC in Cr.No.13/2025, on the file of the Inspector of Police, District crime Branch, Salem District.

For Intervener:

Mr.J.Karuppiah For Petitioner(s):

M/s.Rk.Gandhi For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 120B, 406, 417, 420, 468, 471 of IPC in Crime No.13 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against this petitioner is that, the petitioner joining hands with other accused, promised to sell the land belongs to them and obtained a sum of Rs.61.50 lakhs from the defacto complainant through the bank transactions. Hence, the complaint has been lodged.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is having land and it is not a case of cheating and since the defacto complainant has come forward to purchase the property and they are having their patta to the lands they come forward to sell the land and there is no cheating involved in this case. Therefore, he prays for grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the intervener submitted that total amount paid by the defacto complainant alone in this case is Rs.75 lakhs out of which Rs.61.50 lakhs was paid to the petitioner herein and further revealed that no lands were available with the petitioner herein and though it is claimed by the petitioner that they have some lands, those lands are inalienable lands. Hence, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that A1 colluded with this petitioner and collected huge amount and the investigation revealed

that so far Rs.3.7 cores have been received by A1 in this case and from this defacto complainant alone Rs.75 lakhs have been received and the investigation is pending and so far no money is recovered from the arrested person and the petitioner and other accused is also absconding. Hence, she opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the fact that huge amount of Rs.75 lakhs have been collected from the defacto complainant herein claiming that they have saleable interest in some lands however it revealed that there was no such lands and this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

05-01-2026 Mpa Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To 1.State by, Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Salem District.

Cr.No.13/2025.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

mpa CRL OP No. 35026 of 05-01-2026