Hiran v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Ccb

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 03.03.2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE. K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN CRL.OP.(MD).No.4726 of 2026 Hiran ... Petitioner Vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Inspector of Police, CCB Police Station, Madurai City.

(Crime No.45 of 2025) ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr.Srinivasaragavan Kannan For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottaisamy Government Advocate (Criminal Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER in all cases :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime 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 for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 49 and 61(2)(a) of BNS Act, 2023, in Crime No.45 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks 1/4

anticipatory bail.

2.The petitioner and other four accused obtained Rs.8.50 crore as the workers of the Christian Davies Antique, Bangalore and forged DRDO Certificate and cheated the defacto complainant by assuring supplying iridium. With the above said allegation, the respondent police registered the above said case for the said offence.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submitted that the petitioner is not involved in the case and there was no specific allegation made against the petitioner and the remaining accused only involved in the occurrence. He also submitted that the main accused was arrested in this case and released on bail. In view of the same, he sought anticipatory bail. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) on instructions would submit that they are committed crime in organized manner and cheated the defacto complainant. Hence, he sought dismissal of the bail petition and specifically stated that custodial interrogation is necessary in this case. 5.Considering the submissions made by the learned Government 2/4

Advocate (Crl. Side), and petitioner and other accused allegedly received more than 1.80 crores by giving false promise to supply iridium through forged DRDO certificate and cheated the defacto complainant and investigation is in primitive stage and custodial interrogation is necessary, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. 03.03.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai.

2.The Inspector of Police, CCB Police Station, Madurai City.

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

3/4

K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.4726 of 2026 Date : 03.03.2026 4/4