Vijayakumar v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Dated : 22.10.2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY Vijayakumar ... Petitioner vs.

The State of Tamilnadu represented by, The Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Police Station, Karur.

(Cr.No.18 of 2024) ... Respondent PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.18 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police For Petitioner :Mr.S.T.Sasidharan Tamilkani For Respondent :Mr.S.S.Manoj Government Advocate (Crl.side) ***** 1/5

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 204, 308(3), 318(4) and 336(3) of BNS, 2023 r/w Section 66(D) of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 in Crime No.18 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons under the guise of online arrest, has cheated the de-facto complainant to the tune of Rs.53,06,047/-. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he is no way connected with the alleged occurrence as stated by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/5

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) for the respondent submitted that the petitioner has collected information viz., Aadhar Card, Bank Account details of the de-facto complainant and circulated the same to the other accused, which culminated into the commission of offence alleged against the accused persons. He further submitted that interrogation insofar as the petitioner is necessary to identify the role and involvement of the petitioner as well as the other accused. Hence, he seriously opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) that interrogation insofar as the petitioner is necessary to identify the role and involvement of the petitioner as well as the other accused and also considering the nature of offence committed by the accused, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 22.10.2025 cmr 3/5

To 1.The Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Police Station, Karur.

2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

S.SRIMATHY, J.

cmr 22.10.2025 5/5