Kannan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 15.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Kannan
...Petitioner/Accused
Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, CCB- Madurai City Madurai (Crime No.25 of 2026)
...Respondent
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Balaji For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate(Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.25 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.
1/6
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/A1, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 109, 465, 468,471 and 408 of IPC 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 petitioner while working as a Manager in M/s.Jothi Housing and Mortgage Finance Private Limited , Madurai created documents and without verifying the records sanctioned loans and thereby caused loss to the concern to the tune of Rs. 1,63,45,029/-. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and a false case has been foisted against him. The petitioner has nothing to do with the alleged crime. He would further submit that his work is only confined to processing the loan application and has to collect all documents from the persons who approached their concern for housing loan and he has no authority to sanction loan or collect amount from the customers. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
2/6
4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) would submit that the petitioner while working as a Manager in M/s.Jothi Housing and Mortgage Finance Private Limited , Madurai created documents and without verifying the records sanctioned loans and thereby caused loss to the tune of Rs.1,63,45,029/- by violating rules. He sanctioned loans to various persons and the same has not been recovered. However even some of the persons repaid the loan amount and the said loan amount was not credited in the account of the defacto complainant. He would further submit that the offences are grave in nature and the investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offence and the alleged occurrence took place between 01.01.2021 to 01.12.2023 but the First Information Report has been registered on 27.03.2026 and the alleged offences are borne out of records and even according to the prosecution the allegation against the petitioner is non recovery of loan amount and the petitioner is only working as a Manager 3/6
and the loan was not sanctioned only by this petitioner and the same was also forwarded to head office and thereafter only loan was sanctioned and also the fact that no previous case is pending against the petitioner and the FIR has been registered on 27.03.2026 and by this time material part of the investigation might have been completed this Court is inclined to 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 appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai 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 Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
4/6
[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) 15.06.2026 aav To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai 2.The Inspector of Police, CCB- Madurai City Madurai 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
P. DHANABAL, J aav
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 11054 of 2026 Date : 15.06.2026 6/6