Arunkumar v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY CRL OP(MD) NO. 14595 of 2025 ArunKumar ..Petitioner Vs State Of Tamilnadu, Rep By The Inspector Of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Madurai, Madurai District.

(Crime No.2 of 2017) Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):

Mr.N.Dilip Kumar for Mr.S.Balamurugan For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.S.Manoj Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.2 of 2017 on the file of the Respondent Police.

1/9

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 406, 420 r/w 511 of IPC, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulations Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, in Crime No.2 of 2017 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the real owner of the company namely, Senthilvel and Selvakumar, and others allegedly floated a company and cheated 48500 victims and collected a sum of Rs.85 crores.Hence, a case was registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the the petitioner was employed in the said company and he is an innocent person and he has not committed any 2/9

offence as alleged by the prosecution. He, however, submitted that the petitioner is willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) submitted that the petitioner is a director of the said company. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.The real owner of the said company is Senthilvel (A8) and Selvakumar(A9). The said Senthilvel died, pending investigation. According to the petitioner, he was appointed as Computer operator on 12.02.2013. while he was in service, he was promoted as Director on 27.04.2023. He served as Director until 2016. On 28.09.2016, he resigned from the said post. The said Company has collected huge amount from 48400 victims. The investigation reveals that the respondent has 3/9

identified some of the properties and the attachment is under process of execution. The portion of the property is with PACL. The petitioner resigned his post in the year 2016.

6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and also and also the fact that there are no previous cases pending against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and 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 of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 4/9

Thousand only) with sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition 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 Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b) the petitioner shall furnish his residential address and mobile number to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madurai. In the event of any change in his residential address, the petitioner shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madurai;

5/9

(c)the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) to the credit of Crime No.02 of 2017 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madurai. On such deposit, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, shall accept the sureties furnished by the petitioners. After receipt of entire amount, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, shall deposit the said amount in an interest bearing Fixed Deposit in any nationalized Bank initially for a period of one year and renew them periodically until the final order/Judgment is passed in the case in Crime No.02 of 2017. The learned Judicial Magistrate or Trial Court shall pass orders regarding entitlement of the said amount in its final order/Judgment.

6/9

(d)the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police as and when required for interrogation;

(e) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(f) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(g) 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 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] and;

7/9

(h) if the accused/petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.

05.11.2025 vsg To 1.The learned Judicial Magistrate, Madurai.

2.The Inspector Of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Madurai, Madurai District.

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

8/9

S.SRIMATHY.J., vsg Crl.O.P.(MD).No.14595 of 2025 Date : 05.11.2025 9/9