N. Jeevanadam v. State Rep.By, The Station House Officer,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL.O.P.No.36105 of 2025 N.Jeevanadam ... Petitioner

Versus

The State rep by its, The Station House Officer, Town Police Station, Karaikal District, Pondicherry State.

(Crime No.290 of 2025) .. 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 his arrest in Crime No.290 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner :

Mr.R.C.Paul Kanagaraj For M/s.P.J.Anitha For Respondent :

Mr.M.V.Ramachandra Murthy Public Prosecutor, Puducherry.

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 351(3), 318(4) of BNS, in Crime No.290 of 2025 registered on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

1/6

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he made a promise to get a government job for the defacto complainant and obtained Rs.5 lakhs in various installments. Subsequently when she demanded back the same for the purpose of avoiding repayment, the petitioner fabricated the power of attorney and promissory notes and issued a legal notice and demanded money from her. Hence, the present case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that it is not the case of job racketing, the victim herein borrowed money from the petitioner, and there were also other transactions between the parties. He further submitted that he is ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner has collected a sum of Rs.5 lakhs from the defacto complainant and subsequently cheated her. He further submitted that he has four previous cases, out of which three cases were registered in the State of Puducherry and one case in Tamil Nadu. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) appearing for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record. 2/6

6. On perusal of the FIR and other connected materials, it was revealed that this is a case of collecting money from the defacto complainant in various instalments to arrange a government job and the alleged payments were made in the year 2024, and legal notices were issued by the petitioner herein, this Court is of the view that investigating the case is of such a nature that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary, therefore, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen

(15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Karaikal, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only), with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

(a) the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b) the petitioner shall report before the concerned 3/6

Court, daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; (c) the petitioner shall submit his sample signature or thumb impression if any required, for the purpose of interrogation.

(d) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (e) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(f) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; and;

(g) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 30.01.2026 drl 4/6

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Karaikal.

2. The Station House Officer, Town Police Station, Karaikal District, Pondicherry State.

3.The Public Prosecutor, Pondicherry.

5/6

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

drl CRL.O.P.No.36105 of 2025 30.01.2026 6/6