Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/9020/2025dismissed

A.C.Praveenrao @ Praveen v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

2025-06-17Honourable Mr Justice P.Vadamalai5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 17/06/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI and CRL MP(MD). Nos.7171 & 7534 of 2025 A.C.Praveenrao @ Praveen, S/o.Chinnadurai ... Petitioner/Accused Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Economic Offence Wing, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District - 626002.

(Crime No.2 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Marees Kumar E, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.S.Prakash, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For Intervenors : Mr.S.Karthick Ramkumar, Advocate 1/5

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.2 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 61(2), 318(4) and 316(2) of BNS, 2023 r/w. Section 21(3) of BUDS Act r/w. Section 5 of TNPID Act. in Crime No.2 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that A1 to A3 approached the de-facto complainant by introducing themselves as persons running a biryani business across Tamil Nadu under the name and style of "Maraikayar Briyani" with their head office at Rajapalayam. They claimed to offer franchises throughout Tamil Nadu and promised to provide kitchen vessels and other equipment required for preparing biryani. Believing their representations, the de-facto complainant visited their office in Rajapalayam. At that time, they assured him that a profit of Rs.50,000/- per month could be earned from the said business. Trusting their words, the de-facto complainant initially paid a certain amount to the account of 2/5

Maraikayar Briyani. However, after receiving the money, the accused allegedly cheated him. Hence, the present case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He is merely a worker of the said company, and the entire money was received only by A1 to A3. Since the petitioner was an employee of the said company, he has been implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the intervenors submitted that the intervenors are victims of the scam committed by the said company, and that they had invested a huge amount of money in the business. He also submitted that the petitioner is the main accused in this case, who canvassed the victims to invest in the said business. He further submitted that none of the accused has been arrested till date. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that there are 3/5

totally nine accused persons in this case and the petitioner has been arrayed as A8. All the other accused are still absconding. He further submitted that the petitioner acted as a canvasser and is the administrator of the said company. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and considering the strong objection raised by the learned counsel for the intervenors as well as the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), and also taking note of the fact that the investigation is at a preliminary stage, and that a huge sum of money is involved, and that none of the accused has been secured so far, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. sd/- 17/06/2025 / TRUE COPY / /07/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

4/5

MKN TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIRUDHUNAGAR, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT - 626 002.

2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9020 of 2025 Date :17/06/2025 NM/14.07.2025/ 5P/3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 5/5