Karthikeyan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Mattuthavani

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30/06/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Karthikeyan, S/o. Muniyasamy, No. 19, Velavan Illam, Chandragandhi Nagar, Bye-Pass Road, Madurai - 625016..

... Petitioner/Accused Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Mattuthavani Police Station, Madurai District.

(Crime No. 124 of 2026)..

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Anand R., Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian, Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) 1/7

PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- C-24B. For Bail in Crime No. 124 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Sole accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.05.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 406, 420 and 506(i) of IPC in Crime No.124 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 2.The allegation against the petitioner is that he promised to secure a Government job for the defacto complainant, who is a differently abled person, and subsequently collected a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- in the year 2021. Thereafter, he allegedly collected another sum of Rs.5,00,000/- in cash. Subsequently, when the defacto complainant demanded the return of the money, the petitioner stated that the amount collected from him had been invested in some other business. However, the defacto complainant later came to know that there was no such business investment, and hence, he lodged a complaint against the petitioner. 2/7

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the money received by the petitioner was only for the purpose of a business transaction. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, he was unable to succeed in the business, and hence, a false complaint has been lodged as if he had promised to secure a job. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation. The petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.05.2026. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner was arrested, no amount was recovered and the petitioner is not having any previous cases. He would further submit that the investigation is still pending and the offences are grave in nature. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

3/7

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and the nature of offences levelled against the petitioner and a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- has been paid, though the payments were made in the year 2021 and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, this petition is ordered and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation. [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which she is suspected;

4/7

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[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 BNS.

(K R S J) 30.06.2026 VSG 5/7

TO 1.The learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai. 2.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Madurai District. 3.The Inspector of Police, Mattuthavani Police Station, Madurai District.

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

6/7

K. RAJASEKAR,J., vsg

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.12823 of 2026 Date : 30/06/2026 7/7