S.Jai Anandh v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Melapalayam

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 27/03/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL S.Jai Anandh, S/o.Sekar, ... Petitioner/Accused Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Melapalayam Police Station, Tirunelveli City, Crime No. 658/2023.

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.I.Pinaygash, For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottai Chamy, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.658 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police 1/6

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 120(A), 341, 294(b) and 506(i) of IPC (Corresponding offences 318(4), 316(2), 61(2), 126(2), 296(b) and 351 (2) of BNS) in Crime No.658 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the on 11.07.2019, the petitioner received a car loan amount of Rs. 11,00,000/- from the defacto complainant for purchasing a second-hand car and thereafter failed to repay the same. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent persons and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

2/6

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that there is a money dispute between the parties and the petitioner has no previous case. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner and considering the facts that there is a dispute between the parties in respect of money transaction and also no previous case is pending against the petitioner, I am 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-V, Tirunelveli, and on further conditions that: 3/6

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of 30 days and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation. [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 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) 27.03.2026 TTA 4/6

TO 1.Inspector of Police, Melapalayam Police Station, Tirunelveli City,

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

5/6

P. DHANABAL,J TTA

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.6050 of 2026 Date : 27/03/2026 6/6