Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 35614 (MAD)

Ranchodmal Rathod v. The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police

CRL OP/9121/2026 · 2026-06-09

M Nirmal Kumar

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRL OP No. 9121 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09-06-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR CRL OP No. 9121 of 2026 and Crl.M.P.No.6447 of 2026 1. Ranchodmal Rathod S/o Poonamji, Shop No.2, H B Complex, Butter Market, Hubli. Dharwad, Karnataka. Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Cyber Crime Wing, Tambaram City Police, Sholinganallur, Chennai. Crime No.07 of 2024. Respondent(s) PRAYER To call for the records and quash the 41(A) Cr.P.C. Notice issued by the respondent dated 27.12.2025 against the petitioner herein and pass such orders. For Petitioner(s): Mr.A.Murugavel For Respondent(s): M/s.R. Rajasekaran Government Advocate (crl. Side) ORDER The petitioner was served with a notice under Section 41(A) of CrPC referring to Crime No.7 of 2024, against which the present petition has been filed. 2.The learned counsel for the petition submitted that the petitioner sent a reply to the 41(A) notice, stating that he is dealing with agriculture, electrical 1 / 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 9121 of 2026 and industrial products, including wires and cables and he is also super stock list for Larsen and Tuobro (L&T) electrical standard products for the last 10 years. During the business transaction, he had come and contact with melody metals and the petitioner quoted the price and bank details. Thereafter, during December, 2023, amounts were transferred. In the meanwhile, the rates of the products have escalated. But, the petitioner was insisted to supply materials at the old rate. Thereafter, the petitioner after one month had returned the entire amount which was deposited by melody metals. On 12.01.2024, the petitioner received a notice from HDFC Bank, that his OD account has been closed on the instructions given by Cyber Crime Department. In this regard, the petitioner was called for enquiry in CSR.No.3 of 2024. The petitioner appeared and given his explanation and also his account was de-frozed on 24.01.2024. Thereafter, another notice from HDFC Bank freezing the petitioner’s OD account was received referring to Crime No.7 of 2024. The petitioner’s legal representative presented before the authorities on 26.12.2024, given representation and also submitted all related documents. The respondent informed that they will consider the petitioner’s representation and the relating documents strictly. But, the same was not considered and the petitioner was consequently issued with another 41(A) notice. He further submitted that the petitioner is aged about 63 years and he is doing business at Hubli, a far away place. This notice is nothing but an abuse of process of law. Hence, he has filed this petition. 2 / 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 9121 of 2026 3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that on the complaint of one Saravanan, a case has been registered in Crime No.7 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 of IPC and Section 66D of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. The complaint is that the defacto complainant was approached and he was asked to join the Wazzup group called “Sequoia Exchange Discussion (A77)” through webex sessions and thereafter contact details were given. The primary account through the application called SEQUOIA was created and the defacto complainant was asked to load money to buy stocks and as per the directions, he transferred a sum of Rs.34,05,000/- to the said account. Though the defacto complainant was promised that he is free to withdraw from the business and take back the money and to withdraw the amount deposited, but restrictions were placed and the amounts were withheld and the petitioner could not withdraw the amount of Rs.4,00,000/- which got credited on 28.12.2023. When the defacto complainant contacted, he was asked to pay another Rs.30,00,000/- more and finding the foul play, he had lodged a complaint to the Commissioner of Police, Tambaram, and thereafter enquiry was initiated and FIR was registered. 4.For the purpose of investigation in Crime No.7 of 2024, the petitioner was issued with Section 41(A) notice. The petitioner, being an accused, cannot question Section 41(A) notice. The petitioner can put all his defence before the 3 / 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 9121 of 2026 respondent police during enquiry. It is for the petitioner to appear before the respondent police and to give his explanation along with the materials available in support of his case. 5.In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to quash the 41(A) Cr.P.C. notice issued by the respondent dated 27.12.2025. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. 09-06-2026 krk Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No To 1.The Inspector of Police Cyber Crime Wing, Tambaram City Police, Sholinganallur, Chennai. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai. 4 / 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 9121 of 2026 M.NIRMAL KUMAR J. krk CRL OP No. 9121 of 2026 and Crl.M.P.No.6447 of 2026 09-06-2026 5 / 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis