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

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 05.03.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN CRL OP(MD)No.4791 of 2026 1.Karthi 2.Lakshmi ... Petitioners / Accused Rank Not Known

Versus

The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Pudukkottai, Pudukkottai District.

(Crime No.Not Known of 2026) ... Respondent / Complainant PRAYER :-Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.Not Known of 2026 on the file of the respondent police or on their appearance.

For Petitioners :

Mr.K.Muthurakkan For Respondent :

Mr.P.Kottai Chamy, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/5

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/accused, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police in Crime No.Not Known of 2026 for the offences punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant, along with other persons, became acquainted with the petitioners through online means. It is alleged that the petitioners cheated the defacto complainant and the others by making false promises of providing jobs in a foreign country and thereby obtained unlawful gain. Hence, the above case was registered for the aforesaid offences.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and that they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioners would abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

2/5

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that at the time of filing of this petition, no case had been registered. During the enquiry, the respondent police collected material to show that there is a serious allegation against the petitioners in relation to job racketting. He further submitted that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is necessary. Hence, he objected to the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. This Court heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials placed on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the investigating agency has collected sufficient material to show that the petitioners are involved in job racketting, this Court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is necessary. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 05.03.2026 pal 3/5

To 1.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Pudukkottai, Pudukkottai District.

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

4/5

K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN ,J.

pal

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.4791 of 2026 Date : 05.03.2026 5/5