A.K.Paulpandi v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Dcb

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 15/04/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL A.K.Paulpandi ... Petitioner/Accused No.1 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, DCB, Madurai District, Crime No.14/2024.

... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.14/2024 on the file of the respondent police For Petitioner : N. Balasubramanian, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottaichamy, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 294(b), 506(i) and 120(b) of IPC, in Crime No.14 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are the close relative and the petitioner approached the defacto complainant and insisted him to invest the amount in real estate business. On believing his words, he also gave a sum of Rs.7 lakhs on 15,02,2022, Rs.3 lakh on 09.06.2022 and Rs.2 lakhs on 04.07.2022. For which, the petitioner also paid the amount of Rs.5,52,000/- as interest. Thereafter, on repeated demands were made by the defacto complainant, the petitioner failed to pay the principal amount and he threatened the complainant with dire consequences. Thereafter, he came to know that the petitioner cheated the amount of Rs.2,33,65,725/- from 60 persons. Hence, the case.

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

he has no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that the petitioner already paid a sum of Rs.3 crores to the investors through his bank account and hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that there is a money dispute between the parties and the petitioner cheated the amount of Rs.2,33,65,725/- from 61 persons including the petitioner and the investigation is still pending and the petitioner has 3 previous cases. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He would further submit that he already repaid the amount of Rs.5,52,000/- 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 there is a business transaction between the parties and even according to the prosecution, the petitioner repaid the part of the amount to the investors and though 3/6

the petitioner has 3 previous cases, those cases are not similar kind of offences and in all cases, he was granted bail and even according to the prosecution, the occurrence was took place from 11.02.2022 to 04.07.2022 and FIR was registered on 14.12.2024, 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 Judicial Magistrate No.1, 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 4/6

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.

15.04.2026 dss 5/6

P. DHANABAL,J dss To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Madurai.

2.The Inspector of Police, DCB, Madurai District.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.6158 of 2026 Date : 15/04/2026 6/6