Paul Raja @ Paul Raj v. The State Of Tamilnadu, Rep. By Its The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date :19.02.2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY CRL OP(MD)No.14630 of 2025 Paul Raja @ Paul Raj ... Petitioner Vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Inspector of Police, Kanyakumari Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

(Crime No.86 of 2025) ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr.A.Gowtham For Respondent : Mr.S.S.Manoj Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.P.T.Ramesh Raja PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.86 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER: The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police 1/6

for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 296(b) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.86 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had made false promise to de-facto complainant's husband that he is aware of a place where gold jewellery can be bought at a cheapest rate and cheated the de-facto complainant's husband to the tune of Rs.12,50,000/-. Following that the petitioner had paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- and assured that he will return the balance on 15.11.2024. Thereafter when the de-facto complainant approached the petitioner along with her mother-in-law for collecting the remaining amount, the petitioner had threatened them with dire consequences. Hence, the apprehension of arrest. Hence, a case has been registered as against the petitioner.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioner has not committed any offence. He seeks this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

2/6

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the offences committed by the petitioner are serious in nature.

5.It is submitted that the petitioner has already returned Rs.5 Lakhs/- to the petitioner and the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit further Rs.3 Lakhs/-.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, 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 I, Nagercoil within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready and on further conditions 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. 3/6

[b] the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Only), to the credit of Crime No.86 of 2025 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Nagercoil. The defacto complainant is permitted to withdraw the said Rs.3 Lakhs/-.

[c]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. [d]the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[e]the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [f]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 is 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 of BNS.

7.As far as the balance Rs.4,50,000/- is concerned, the parties are at liberty to adjudicate the same as per law. According to the defacto 4/6

complainant, there are some more persons who are involved in the case. Therefore, the respondent is directed to do proper investigation in this case. 19.02.2026 TMG TO

1. The Learned Judicial Magistrate-I Nagercoil.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kanyakumari Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

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

5/6

S.SRIMATHY,J TMG

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.14630 of 2025 Date : 19.02.2026 6/6