S. Venkatachalam v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Pudukottai, District Crime Branch

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 10.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL S.Venkatachalam

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Pudukottai.

(Crime No. 12 of 2026)

...Respondent

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Balaji Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 12 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

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, 417 and 420 of IPC in Crime No. 12 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is an employee of a jewellary shop. During the year 2020-21, in connection with business transactions between the jewellery establishments, the defacto complainant entrusted 1274.017 grams of gold jewes, out of which 479.096 grams were returned and the value for 485.870 grams gold were paid; however, the petitioner failed to return 309.51 grams of gold. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prayed to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

2/6

4. The learned Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) would submit that based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, a case has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 417 and 420 of IPC in Crime No. 12 of 2026. He would further submit that there is a business transaction between the parties. He would further submit that the petitioner has no previous case. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, and considering the facts that on perusal of FIR, it appears that there is a business transaction between the parties and a part of the amount was paid and for the nonpayment of remaining amount, FIR has been registered and considering the facts that even according to the prosecution, the alleged occurrence took place in the year 2020, but the FIR has been registered only on 16.05.2026 and also the petitioner has no previous case, I am inclined to 3/6

grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his/her appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Pudukottai, 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 learned Judicial Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during 4/6

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 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.

(P D B J) 10.06.2026 apd To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-II, Pudukottai.

2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Pudukottai.

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

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J apd

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 10637 of 2026 Date : 10.06.2026 6/6