← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/10200/2026granted

N. Vijayakumar v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Thanjavur

2026-06-05Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 05/06/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

1. N. Vijayakumar

2. Kanagavalli

3. Neethipathi

4. Ranjitha ... Petitioners/Accused Rank Not Known Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police Station, Thanjavur.

(Crime No. 20 of 2025). ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.20 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : S.Sankar, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the 1/6

respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 355, 336(2) & (3), 338, 340(1) & (2), 341(1), 319(2), 318(4), 61(2), 49 of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.20 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is running a real estate business. A1 is the proprietor of "Mass Computer". The petitioner, along with the other accused, cheated the defacto complainant an amount of Rs.5,80,55,160/- from 03.05.2023 to 08.11.2024 by creating fake work orders in connection with install computers in various colleges. 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 they are no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that the entire amount was transferred to the account of A1 only and no case is pending against the petitioners and A2 was already released on anticipatory bail. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

2/6

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner, along with the other accused, cheated the defacto complainant an amount of Rs.5,80,55,160/- from 03.05.2023 to 08.11.2024 by creating fake work orders in connection with install computers in various colleges and the investigation is still pending and huge amount was involved in this case. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. He would further submit that no case is pending against the petitioners and the co-accused was already released on anticipatory bail.

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 there is a commercial transaction between the parties and even according to the prosecution, the entire amount was transferred to the account of A1 and thereafter, it was transferred to the account of these petitioners and apart from that, no other allegation against these petitioners and no previous case is 3/6

pending against these petitioners and the co-accused was already released on anticipatory bail and FIR has been registered on 14.08.2025, by this time, the material part of the investigation might have been completed, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Thanjavur, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police, every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of 4 weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation.

[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of 4/6

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 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) 05.06.2026 dss 5/6

P. DHANABAL,J dss To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.2, Thanjavur.

2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police Station, Thanjavur. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10200 of 2026 Date : 05/06/2026 6/6