V.Sakthivel v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Eow

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 19.11.2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY CRL OP(MD)No.20593 of 2025 V.Sakthivel ... Petitioner/ Accused No.4 Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, Economic Offence Wing, Dindigul, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.2 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.T.Indrachithu For Respondent : Mr.S.S.Manoj Government Advocate (Crl. side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.2 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

1/5

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120(b), of IPC r/w. Section 5 of Tamil Nadu Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishment) Act, 1997 r/w. Section 21(3), 25 of BUDS Act, in Crime No.2 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons collected deposits from the public by promising higher returns and interest rates, but later defaulted and failed to repay a sum of Rs.16,33,50,000/-. The allegation against the petitioner is that, as an unregistered shareholder and treasurer, he received Rs.1,97,45,104/- in his account. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

2/5

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent Police submits that the accused persons collected deposits from the public by promising higher returns and interest rates, but later defaulted and failed to repay a sum of Rs.16,33,50,000/-. The allegation against the petitioner is that, as an unregistered shareholder and treasurer, he received Rs.1,97,45,104/- in his account. Therefore, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. The allegation against the petitioner is that he, along with the other accused, received more than Rs.16 crores from the public on the pretext of distributing gold coins for further investment. Considering the above facts and also considering the magnitude of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. (S S Y J) 19.11.2025 jbr 3/5

To

1. The Inspector of Police, Economic Offence Wing, Dindigul, Dindigul District.

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

4/5

S.SRIMATHY,J.

jbr

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.20593 of 2025 Date : 19.11.2025 5/5