Crl.O.P.No.18187 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09.07.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Crl.O.P.No.18187 of 2025 R.Ramu ... Petitioner/Accused Vs The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police, Ariyalur. (Crime No.05 of 2025) ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Crime No.05 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police. For petitioner : Mr.S.Dheerendran For Respondent : Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl. Side) ORDER The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.06.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 1/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18187 of 2025 and 506(i) of I.P.C., 1860 in connection with Crime No.05 of 2025, on the file of the respondent, seeks bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner opened a pawn shop in the year 2023 and issued loans at lower interest rates. However, within two years, the petitioner closed the shop and failed to return mortgaged jewels to the de-facto complainant and others. Hence the case. 3.The contention of the learned counsel for petitioner is that the petitioner, a pawn broker was running business from the year 2003. Since there was several pawnees, who had taken loan but not repaid the interest or principal amount, the petitioner suffered loss and closed the business. Prior to it, he sent notice to all the pawnees but none responded. Now false complaint given as though the petitioner cheated the pawnees and misappropriated the jewels and the jewels are not available. According to the petitioner, jewels are with the petitioner’s possession and he is ready to hand over to the pawnees, 2/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18187 of 2025 provided, they pay principal and interest amount. Hence, he prayed for granting bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police field his counter submitting that on 05.06.2025, based on the current paper received from the Superintendent of Police vide C.No.C1/9592/SP/ALR/2025, dt.05.06.2025, the respondent police registered the case. The complaint is that the de-facto complainant's husband, who is working abroad, purchased jewels from the defacto complainant. On 07.10.2023, due to the family circumstances, the defacto complainant went to Sendurai to mortgage her jewels at pawn broker shop. At the time, she met her distance relative, accused kulumbur Ramu, S/o Ramchandran. He informed that he opened one pawn broker shop in the name of Sri Ganapathi Pawn Broker shop and collect 1 paise lower interest on mortgage loan, whereas others collect 2 paise. The defacto complainant trusted the accused and mortgage the 92 sovereign jewels with accused in different date and 3/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18187 of 2025 received the receipts. In this situation, last year when the complainant went to accused pawn broker shop with principal amount to recover the mortgage jewels, the shops found closed. The complainant came to know from the neighbours that accused not obtained proper licence for the shop and cheated several persons. The complainant went to accused village kulumbur and met parents of the accused who assured to return the jewels. Thereafter, parents of the accused informed complainant that accused is absconding and they can do nothing. On 08.04.2025, the complainant again went to the house of the accused and met accused and asked return of jewels but accused threatened the complainant. Thus the accused cheated 22 sovereign of jewels from Sakthimani, Kunnam village, 7 sovereigns from Sundrapandiayan, Pilakurichi, 1½ soverigns from Anjutham, Sendurai, Rs.7 lakshs from Thirunavukarasu, 4½ sovereigns from Elavarasi. 4/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18187 of 2025 5.He further submitted that during investigation it was found that the petitioner not obtained license in the name of Sri Ganapathy Pawn Broker under Section 14-A of the Tamil Nadu Pawn Broker’s Act. Now the respondent police received complaints from 96 persons, which is as follows: 5/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18187 of 2025 6/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18187 of 2025 7/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18187 of 2025 6.He further submitted that the petitioner’s house searched but no jewels recovered, except for documents to show that petitioner further pledged jewels of pawnees at higher interest with others. Now the pawnees unable to recover the jewels. Hence, strongly opposed for granting bail to the petitioner. 7.Considering the submissions made on either side and on perusal of the counter affidavit, it is seen that the petitioner had cheated 96 victims to the tune of Rs.1,39,86,425/-. In view of the same, this Court is not inclined to entertain this bail petition and the same is dismissed. 09.07.2025 rsi Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No 8/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18187 of 2025 To: 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ariyalur. 2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police, Ariyalur. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court Madras. 9/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18187 of 2025 M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J. rsi Crl.O.P.No.18187 of 2025 09.07.2025 10/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis