Mathivathanagiri v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19-02-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Mathivathanagiri ..Petitioner(s) Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Police State Cyber Crime Investigation Unit, Ashok Nagar, Chennai- 600 083.
Crime No. 91 of 2025 ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police in Crime No. 91 of 2025, on the file of respondent police For Petitioner(s):
Mr.A.N.Rajan of Mr.K.V.Gopinath For Respondent(s):
Ms.J.R.Archana, GA (crl.side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2) of BNS and 66 D of the Informationa Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 INF C in connection with the Cr.No.91 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.
2 .The allegations against the petitioner is that he has been arrayed as A5 in this case. The complaint regarding a fake investment scam was unearthed by the respondent police based on the complaint lodged by the defacto complainant, wherein it was stated that a sum of Rs.20 lakhs was transferred by the defacto complainant as investment. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that A4 had collected a sum of Rs.3.88 crores from the defacto complainant by utilizing more than 20 bank accounts. It is further alleged that bank accounts belonged to A1 to A3, through which a sum of Rs.20 lakhs was transacted. It was further revealed A1 to A3 bank accounts were operated by A4 with the help of this petitioner. It is also alleged that this petitioner received a sum of Rs.1 lakh and handed over Rs.50,000/- to A1. Hence, the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused in this case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that petitioner was not directly involved in the alleged offence and that he had only handed over the bank account to A1 to A3 to A4 on the request of A4 for the purpose of carrying out genuine investment business. However, the petitioner was not aware that those accounts would be utilized for committing the allege scam. The petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation and
prays for grant of anticipatory bail.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner had also benefited by receiving a sum of Rs.1 lakh in connection with the scam and therefore opposed the grant of anticipatory bail.
5. Considering the nature of the allegation and the amount handled by the petitioner, which is Rs.1 lakh, out of which, a sum of Rs.50,000/- was paid to A1, and though a huge amount is involved in the alleged scam, considering the over act attributed to this petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions.
6. The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- to the credit of Crime No. Cr.No.91 of 2025 and shall produce the receipt before the learned 11th Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai. On such deposit, the interim anticipatory bail granted by this Court on 08.01.2026, is made absolute subject to the following conditions:
[a] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 am., for a period two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.
[b] the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
[c]the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [d] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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].
[e] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.
19-02-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order JAI To
1. The Deputy Commissioner of Police State Cyber Crime Investigation Unit, Ashok Nagar,Chennai- 600 083.
2. The 11th Metropolitan Magistrate Court,
Saidapet, Chennai.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
K.RAJASEKAR, J.
JAI 19-02-2026