CRL OP(MD). No. 11845 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 25.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 11845 of 2026 Syed Ibrahim @ Sulthan, S/o.Mohamad Yacob ...Petitioner/A1 Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Dindigul District. (Crime No.2 of 2026) ...Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Thiruvadi Kumar A, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian, Counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side) For Intervenor : Mr.S.A.Ajmalkhan, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER : For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.2 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 11845 of 2026 ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/A1, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 61(2), 316(1), 318(4), 3(5), and 351 of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.2 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant is the Chief Doctor of Anbu Hospital, Palani. The 1st accused was employed as the Manager of the said hospital and was entrusted with the responsibility of handling its financial affairs. It is alleged that, taking advantage of the position so entrusted, the 1st accused, in collusion with the other accused persons, misappropriated the funds of the de-facto complainant. It is further alleged that the accused persons threatened the de-facto complainant with dire consequences. Hence, the present case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 11845 of 2026 the prosecution. Therefore, he prays for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel for the intervenor would submit that the petitioner, along with other accused persons, swindled more than Rs. 30,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs only). He would further submit that the petitioner misused the cheques and transferred the misappropriated amount through various bank accounts. Therefore, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much necessary. Hence, he strongly opposes the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5. The learned counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side), appearing for the respondent police, would submit that the petitioner has been arrayed as A1 in this case. He would further submit that there are no previous cases registered against the petitioner. However, he opposes the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 11845 of 2026 7. Considering the rival submissions made on either side, the nature of the offences alleged against the petitioner, the fact that the alleged offences are said to have taken place on 26.06.2024, whereas the FIR was registered only on 22.01.2026, the fact that, by this time, most of the investigation might have been completed, and the fact that even as per the prosecution, the offences are borne out of records and therefore, there is no scope for tampering with the evidence, and also the fact that there are no previous cases registered against the 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 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.II, Dindigul, 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 Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that: 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 11845 of 2026 [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 Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]; 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 11845 of 2026 [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S. (P D B J) 25.06.2026 (2/2) mkn To 1.The Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Dindigul. 2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Dindigul District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 11845 of 2026 P. DHANABAL, J. mkn ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 11845 of 2026 Dated : 25.06.2026 (2/2) 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis