G. Ashok Kumar v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.01.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.35603 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.283 of 2026 G.Ashok Kumar ... Petitioner Vs.
State represented by The Inspector of Police, J-5 Sastri Nagar Police Station, Adyar District, Chennai.
... Respondent (Crime No.215 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in event of arrest pending investigation in Crime No.215 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Hemanathan For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.M.Raju Sharma
ORDER
The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No.215 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has 1/4
collected a sum of Rs.15 lakhs as loan from the defacto complainant and failed to return the money. Hence, the complaint has been lodged and FIR has been registered.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner admittedly collected a sum of Rs.15 lakhs from the defacto complainant and has been regularly repaying the money; almost Rs.10 lakhs have been repaid and the remaining amount is to be paid in installments. However, the defacto complainant rushed to lodge a complaint for recovery of the money. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that the petitioner is having various methods to obtain loans from various persons and repaying only a minimal amount, claiming themselves it is only a financial transaction, and thereby cheated many persons. Hence he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that though the First Information Report, it is stated that Rs.15 lakhs has been received and not been returned, the investigation revealed that the petitioner herein has paid Rs.4 lakhs to the defacto complainant. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/4
6. Considering the nature of allegation and the fact that it is a case of financial transaction and, though it is stated that Rs.15 lakhs was availed as loan but only Rs.4 lakhs has been paid to the defacto complainant, and so far no one is arrested, 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 is made ready, before the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, 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 of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: (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;
K.RAJASEKAR, J.
3/4
ssi (c) The petitioner 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 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 petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition stands ordered.
08.01.2026 ssi To 1.The IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai.
2. The Inspector of Police, J-5 Sastri Nagar Police Station, Adyar District, Chennai.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Crl.OP.No.35603 of 2025 4/4