Vionthkumar v. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police Dcb, Thoothukudi

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 27.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Vinoth Kumar

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, DCB Police Station, Thoothukudi District (Crime No.42 of 2025)

...Respondent

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Pragalathan For Intervenor :Mr. P.S.Subbaraman For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambiselvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.42 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

1/6

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/A3, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Section 420 of IPC in Crime No.42 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons are running a private chit fund in the name and style of Sri Sakthi Chit funds in and around Thoothukudi District. The defacto complainant has paid a sum of Rs.4,80,000/- in the said company and thereafter the accused persons closed the business and absconded. The further case is that A1 and A2 said to have cheated a sum of Rs.57,97,650/- from various persons. 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 the petitioner only worked as a Manager in the said company and the entire company was run by the other accused. He would further submit that a false complaint has been lodged only to harass the petitioner . Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/6

4. The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner stating that the accused persons has cheated more than 500 depositors to the tune of Rs.4,86,00,000/-

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the accused persons received various money from the victim and thereafter closed the business and absconded. Further A1 and A2 said to have cheated a sum of Rs.57,97,650/- from various persons. He would further submit that the investigation is still pending and the amount involved in this case is huge. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

7. Considering the rival submissions on either side and considering the fact that the occurrence took place on 05.02.2024 and the First Information Report has been registered on 10.11.2025 and even according to the case of prosecution the petitioner only worked as a Manager in the said company and the entire company was run by other accused and there is no active participation in dealing with the business of the chit company and also considering the fact that no previous case is pending against the 3/6

petitioner, 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 anticipatory bail on condition to 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 No.IV, Thoothukudi District 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.

[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 4/6

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) 27.04.2026 aav To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Thoothukudi 2.The Inspector of Police, DCB Police Station, Thoothukudi District 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J aav

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 22263 of 2025 Date : 27.04.2026 6/6