CRL OP(MD). No.19686 of 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 04/06/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No.19686 of 2025 Kannan ... Petitioner/Accused No.3 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, South Gate Police Station, Madurai City, Madurai District, Crime No.359/2025. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.359/2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : M.Raja Raman, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Interveners : Mr.C.Jeyaprakash Mr.A.Balaji Mr.P.A.Rahul for M/s.CRM Legal Mr.M.Rajarajan 1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.19686 of 2025 M/s.Hema Senthil Kumar Mr.T.Balarathinakumar Mr.M.Rajarajan M/s.K.Hema Senthil Kumar Mr.R.Ramanujam ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections318(4) and 351(2) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.359 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant engaged in the business of buying and selling gold and also running a jewellery shop in the name of “Tirukumaran Jewels” and the accused persons also running a jewellery shop in the name of “Bhavani Jewels”. The accused persons approached the defacto complainant and insisted him to do business with them and also demanded 450 grams of gold jewels by giving a false promise that they would give money within 3 months from the date of buying of gold. On believing their words, the defacto complainant also gave 450 grams of gold jewels. Thereafter, even after repeated demands made by him, they abused him in filthy 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.19686 of 2025 language and threatened him with dire consequences and they neither returned the gold nor paid the amount for receiving gold. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that the matter has been already settled between the parties and the co-accused (A1 & A2) were already released on bail. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner along with other accused cheated 450 grams of gold from the defacto complainant. When he demanding money for receiving gold jewels, they abused and threatened him and the investigation is still pending. The accused persons not only cheated the defcato complainant but also cheated many persons, who are doing gold business. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, he would further submit that now, the matter has been settled between the 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.19686 of 2025 parties and the co-accused were already released on bail. 5. The learned counsel for the Interveners would submit that the accused persons received gold jewels from many persons on various occasions and thereafter, failed to pay the amount for receiving gold jewels. Hence, they strongly opposed 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 the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, and during the pendency of the petition, the matter has been referred to mediation and in mediation, the matter has been amicably settled between the parties on some terms and conditions and already the co-accused were also released on bail and FIR has been registered on 01.11.2025, by this time, the material part of the investigation might have been completed, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.19686 of 2025 released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Madurai District, 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 concerned and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of 8 weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation. [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 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.19686 of 2025 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 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. 04.06.2026 10/18 dss 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.19686 of 2025 To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Madurai District. 2.The Inspector of Police, South Gate Police Station, Madurai City, Madurai District, 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.19686 of 2025 P. DHANABAL,J DSS ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.19686 of 2025 Date : 04/06/2026 10/18 8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis