Ranjitha v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Dcb

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 16.02.2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY CRL OP(MD)No.185 of 2026 Ranjitha ... Petitioner Vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, DCB Police Station, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.45 of 2025) ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr.N.Anandha Padmanabhan Senior Advocate For Mr.K.Muthu Ganesa Pandian For Respondent : Mr.S.S.Manoj Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.S.Poorna Chandran PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.45 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER: The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police 1/6

for the offences punishable under Sections 316(1), 316(4), 316(5), 318(3) and 351(2) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.45 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that defacto complainant and his son are running a business under the pretext of M/s. Orril Biomass Granules Private Limited, with 12 crores capital. The 1st accused worked as commercial and operation manager, 2nd accused worked as a Accountant and 3rd accused worked in machine maintenance and as manufacture supervisor. The defacto complainant company had paid sum of Rs.14,57,815/- to Mahendran owner of Maha trading from 05.02.2024 to 09.10.2025 to settle bill amount. He had also informed that the bills were sent under the instructions of the accused. The accused had changed machinery parts with the low quality materials after removing the machinery parts containing high quality materials. The company would pay Rs.

8,00,000/- for rental vehicles every month which is used for transportation of materials from which the 1st and 2nd accused got sum of Rs. 6,20,000/- as a commission. Thus, the accused had misappropriated the funds of the de-facto complainant company and caused up to Rs. 2 Crores/- revenue loss to the company. Hence, the apprehension of arrest. Hence, a case has been registered as against the petitioner.

2/6

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioner has not committed any offence. He seeks this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the offences committed by the petitioner are serious in nature.

5.This Court had directed the petitioner to deposit Rs.5 Lakh/- in the crime number, vide order, dated 07.01.2026. Today, it is reported that the said amount is deposited.

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the 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 bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Learned Judicial Magistrate Court 3/6

No.II, Dindigul, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready and on further conditions that: [a]the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity. [b]It is seen that the petitioner has already deposited Rs.5,00,000/- in the crime number. The petitioner is also directed to deposit a further sum of Rs.6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lakh Only), to the credit of Crime No.45 of 2025 before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Dindigul, in three equal installments within a period of three months from the date on which the order copy made ready.

After receipt of entire amount, the learned Judicial Magistrate, shall deposit the said amount in an interest bearing Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized Bank initially for a period of one year and renew them periodically until the final order/Judgment is passed in the case in Crime No.45 of 2025. The learned Judicial Magistrate or Trial Court shall pass orders regarding entitlement of the said amount in its final order/Judgment.

[c]the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required. [d]the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either 4/6

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 is 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].

[g]If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

16.02.2026 TMG TO

1. Judicial Magistrate -II Dindigul.

2.The Inspector of Police, DCB Police Station, Dindigul District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench Of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

S.SRIMATHY,J TMG

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.185 of 2026 Date : 16.02.2026 6/6