G Arumugam v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Dcb

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 13.05.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN CRL OP(MD). No.9464 of 2026 G.Arumugam ... Petitioner/Accused No.5 Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep By The Inspector of Police, DCB Police Station, Virudhunagar.

(in Crime No.4 of 2026) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.V.Santhakumaresan For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottaichamy Government Advocate (Criminal Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.4 of 2026 pending on the file of the respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused No.5, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Section

120B (61(2) of BNS), 406 (316 (2) of BNS) and 420 (Section 318(4) of BNS) IPC in Crime No.4 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant borrowed loan to the tune of Rs.68 lakhs from A2 by executing a sale deed in respect of the subject property as a security to the said loan transaction. When the defacto complainant was ready to repay the loan amount and when he seeks cancellation of the sale deed, A2 refused to cancel the same and the petitioner herein is said to have supported A2 along with other accused persons. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that he has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is a practising Advocate and had merely rendered legal opinion in connection with the transaction in question. He would further submit that the first accused in this case has filed a petition before this Court seeking to quash the FIR and this Court has granted an

interim order of stay. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) strongly opposes for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. while the defacto complainant had received a sum of Rs.68 lakhs from A2 by way of loan, the other accused persons are alleged to have borrowed a sum of Rs.1.5 crores from the second accused and swindled the remaining amount. He further submits that the petitioner herein is not only as legal advisor but he also forms part of the said conspiracy and swindled the amount.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view the stay granted by this Court in the quash petition, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, II, Virudhunagar, on condition that the petitioner shall 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: (a) the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity;

(b) the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of fifteen days and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; (c)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (d)the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(e)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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]; and;

(f)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.

(KKRKJ) 13.05.2026 ta To 1.The Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Virudhunagar.

2.The Inspector of Police, DCB Police Station, Virudhunagar.

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

K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J.

ta

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9464 of 2026 Date : 13.05.2026