Kodanda Mani v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Ccb
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 27.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Kodanda Mani
...Petitioner/Accused
Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, City Crime Branch, Madurai City (Crime No.1 of 2026)
...Respondent
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Gnanagurunathan For Intervenor : Mr.K.Palankumar For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate(Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.1 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.
1/6
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/A1, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 109 of IPC in Crime No.1 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant had lent money to the first accused person on several occasions for the development of his business and the other accused persons has also assured on behalf of the first accused for the repayment of the said money and thereafter they failed to return the same with interest. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and a false case has been foisted against him. The petitioner has nothing to do with the alleged crime. He would further submit that the defacto complainant has not paid any money to the accused persons. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner stating that several bank transactions were 2/6
made and a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- has been paid to the accused persons. They have several meetings with the defacto complainant and repeatedly instructed the defacto complainant to transfer money to different bank accounts under the guise of banking formalities , approvals and procedural requirement. The accused persons also failed to honour their assurances and issued threats causing mental agony.
5. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) would submit that the accused persons have cheated the defacto complainant by receiving the money for the development of business and thereafter failed to return the same. The amount involved in this case is very huge. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
7. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the considering the fact that the alleged occurrence took place between 01.08.2022 and 31.12.2022 but the First Information Report has been registered on 02.01.2026 and even according to the case of prosecution all the offences are borne out of records and the fact that co-accused were 3/6
released on bail and no previous case is pending against the petitioner and this petitioner also appeared before the respondent police and already for the same occurrence the complaint was lodged before the District Crime Branch, Theni and the same was closed in the year 2024 itself and considering all other factors, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory 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 learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 4/6
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 B.N.S.
(P D B J) 27.04.2026 aav To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai District 2.The Inspector of Police, City Crime Branch, Madurai City 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
P. DHANABAL, J aav
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6175 of 2026 Date : 27.04.2026 6/6