Anbuselvan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Palakkarai
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 06/04/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL
1. Anbuselvan,
2. Pushpa @ Pushpavalli, ... Petitioners/Accused Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Palakkarai Police Station, Trichy City.
Crime No.25/2026.
... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Yovan.P, For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottai Chamy, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS 1/6
PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.25/2026 on the file of the respondent police ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A1 & A2, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 506(1) of IPC, 1860 and the Corresponding offence 318(4) and 351(2) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.25 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners and other accused cheated the defacto complainant by giving false promise that they will arrange government job for the defacto complainant's daughter and her cousin. Believing the same, the defacto complainant gave a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- to the petitioners and other accused. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and 2/6
they are no way connected in the above said incident. They have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) fairly submits that by giving false promise that they will arrange government job for the defacto complainant's daughter and her cousin, the petitioners and other accused received some amount from the defacto complainant and thereafter cheated them. He further submitted that no previous case is pending as against the petitioners. However, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
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 petitioners and even according to the prosecution, the defacto complainant's daughter got a Government job and also considering the facts that no previous case is pending against the petitioners and co-accused was already released on bail, I am inclined 3/6
to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, 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-5, Tiruchirappalli District and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police, on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.
[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature.
[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[e] the petitioners 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 4/6
appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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) 06.04.2026 tta TO 1.Inspector of Police, Palakkarai Police Station, Trichy 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.6662 of 2026 Date : 06/04/2026 6/6