Crl.OP.No. 25589 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 03.12.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL OP NO. 25589 of 2025 Appu @ Sivaraman Petitioner Versus The State rep. by The Inspector of Police H-8, Thiruvottiyur Police Station Tiruvallur District Crime No. 1041 of 2025. ...Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest pending investigation in Crime No. 1041 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.Parthipan J. For Intervener : Mr.M.Gnanasekar For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) ---- O R D E R The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 506(1) of IPC in Crime No. 1041 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 25589 of 2025 anticipatory bail. 2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner known to the de-facto complainant since school days, had borrowed several amounts and gold jewels on various pretexts including construction of a house at Saraswathi Nagar, Avadi and medical expenses. It is further alleged that the the petitioner collected a total sum of Rs.24,65,000/- from the de-facto complainant and 45 sovereigns of gold jewels under false assurances and failed to fulfil his commitments. Hence the complaint. 3.The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated. He contended that the de-facto complainant had borrowed Rs.8,87,489/- from the petitioner, for which, he had already lodged a complaint before the Otteri Police Station on 25.01.2024, and a CSR was also issued. He further submits that the present complaint is lodged only as a counterblast to the petitioner’s earlier complaint. 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 25589 of 2025 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case and submits that the petitioner had collected a huge sums of money and gold jewels from the de- facto complainant on false promises. Therefore, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.After hearing the parties, this Court directed the petitioner as well as the de-facto complainant to appear before the respondent police and submit their documents and other materials to support their claims. After enquiring both the petitioner and the respondent, it came to light that the de-facto complainant had proof of payment of Rs.7,00,000/-, but there was no evidence to show that he had given 40 sovereigns of gold jewels. The petitioner herein has proof of payment of Rs.8,87,000/- to the de-facto complainant. 6.Considering the above submissions made by the learned Counsel on either side, I am of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary to investigate the matter in this case. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 25589 of 2025 copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate at Thiruvottiyur, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: (a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled; [b] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [c] that the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 am for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation. 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 25589 of 2025 [d] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court themselves as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283]; [e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 03.12.2025 MSM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate at Thiruvottiyur. 2.The Inspector of Police H-8, Thiruvottiyur Police Station Tiruvallur District Crime No. 1041 of 2025. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 25589 of 2025 K.RAJASEKAR , J. MSM Crl.O.P.No. 25589 of 2025 03.12.2025. 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis