Suresh v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 19-01-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Suresh ..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep.by, The Inspector of Police CCB-1, Vepery, Chennai-600 007.

Cr.No.204 of 2025.

..Respondent(s) Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS Act, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.204 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.R.Sathyamoorthy For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioner herein apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 of I.P.C. in Crime No.204 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner joining hands with other accused A1 in this case was running a gold coin scheme and collected a sum of Rs.32,00,000/- from the defacto-complainant and cheated forty persons. Hence, the complaint.

__________Page 1 of 4

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ready to pay the amounts collected by them and he further submitted that A1 in this case was arrested and released on bail with condition that A1 shall deposit 25% of the amount collected. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case submitting that the total amount involved is Rs.32,00,000/-. She further submitted that A1 was arrested and subsequently released on bail by the Sessions Court, Chennai, on condition that she deposit 25% of amount immediately upon release and remaining 25% in alternate months. Hence, it is revealed that 50% of the amount is to be paid by the A1 in this case and further remaining 50% is yet to be recovered and no assets have been identified. Hence, opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6.I have also perused the order passed by the trial Court in Crl.M.P.Nos.139 & 310 of 2026 dated 07.01.2026 which reveals that the first accused has agreed to pay 50% of the total cheated amount and the petitioner __________Page 2 of 4

though claims to be the husband of A1, he has also actively participated in the business activities and so far only 50% of the amount is agreed to be paid. At this stage, if the anticipatory bail is granted, it would hamper the investigation. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. 19-01-2026 ep To 1.The Inspector of Police CCB-1, Vepery, Chennai-600 007.

2.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

__________Page 3 of 4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

ep 19-01-2026 __________Page 4 of 4