Balaji Santhanam v. The 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. OP. No.272 of 2026 Balaji Santhanam Petitioner/A14 Vs The State Represented by Inspector of Police, CBCID, (Organized Crime Unit) Salem City Crime No.03 of 2025. Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in connection with Crime No.03 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.L.Ramu For Respondent(s): Ms.J.R.Archana, Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 471, IPC & Section 3 r/w 5 of Emblems and Name Act 1950 and Section 66D Information Technology Act 2000, Section 3 r/w 5 of Emblems and Name Act, 2000 in Crime No.03 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that one Ayyamperumal gave an information to RBI stating that some un-identified persons collecting amount from the public to give money to the officers of RBI for releasing certain funds received from the Central Government for sale of iridium copper and based on the information, the Assistant General Manager, RBI lodged a complaint. The investigation revealed that some victims were approached by petitioner and other accused, by claiming that, they need investors to fund them, for the purpose of paying kickbacks to officers of RBI, in order to collect foreign funds for several crores and by their modus huge amounts were collected by the accused group. Hence, this case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an unnamed accused in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the co-accused was released on bail by this Court in Crl.OP.No.21880 of 2025 dated 11.09.2025. He further submitted that the petitioner was not aware of the serious allegations levelled against some of the other arrested accused. He further submitted that the petitioner herein is only a victim of a case and he could not be

termed as an accused in this case. Therefore, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the petitioner along with other accused was involved in various types of malpractices and had also fabricated bogus documents. He further submitted that the petitioner also actively participated in this case and received the cheated money collected from the victims. He further submitted that the statements recorded from the arrested accused has revealed that this petitioner has paid money to one Senthilkumar /A19 and this petitioner has not personally benefited from any of the transactions. Hence, he opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the above submissions made on either side, though this court has earlier dismissed the bail application, now it is reported that petitioner has not benefitted in this case, this Court is inclined to grant

anticipatory bail to the petitioner with 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.4, Salem, 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 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 respondent police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

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

investigation or trial;

(e) 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;

(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

08.01.2026 To 1.Inspector of Police, CBCID, (Organized Crime Unit) Salem City 2.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR, J., gv CRL OP NO.272 of 2026 08.01.2026