Kutty @ Muthukrishnan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Karur Town

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30.03.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 5540 of 2026 Kutty @ Muthukrishnan

...Petitioner/Accused No.2

Vs 1.State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Karur Town Police Station, Karur District.

(Crime No.1100 of 2025) 2.The State of Tamilnadu rep. by Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Karur District.

...Respondents/Complainants

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Vadivel Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 1100 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.02.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(3) and 318(6) of BNS Act, in Crime No.1100 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is running a jewellary shop in the name of Kairasi Jewellers and the defacto complainant is the regular customer to that shop. Based on such acquaintance, during the January 2025, the accused has borrowed a sum of Rs.11,00,000/- from the defacto complainant agreeing to repay the same within six months and for the same the accused has given the document of his house standing in his name in S.F.No.577/1 to the defacto complainant as security and also issued three signed bonds to him. After six months, when the defacto complainant asked the accused to return back his money, the accused has failed to return the same. Thereafter, the accused has switched off his mobile phone and also closed his jewellery shop and thereby cheated the defacto complainant. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has 2/6

not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.02.2026. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that based on the complaint lodged by the defacto complainant the present case has been registered. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner. However, the accused has no previous case. He would further submit that except this accused other accused are still absconding. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submitted that the case was initially registered by the first respondent and later it was transferred to the District Crime Branch, who is the second respondent herein.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the petitioner is the brother of the first accused, who has not 3/6

actively participated in the business and licence was taken in the name of the first accused, no previous case is pending against the petitioner and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to 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 Judicial Magistrate No.I Court, Karur, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the 4/6

Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(P D B J) 30.03.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Karur.

2.The Inspector of Police, Karur Town Police Station, Karur District.

(Crime No.1100 of 2025) 3.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Karur District.

4.The Superintendent, Karur Sub Prison, Karur. 5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 5540 of 2026 Date : 30.03.2026 6/6