Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 52880 (MAD)

Anandu v. The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by

CRL OP(MD)/14428/2026 · 2026-07-21

K Rajasekar

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRL OP(MD). No.14428 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 21.07.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD)No.14428 of 2026 Anandu ... Petitioner / Accused No.5 Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, CCD-III Police Station, Thanjavur District. (Crime No.59 of 2026) ... Respondent / Complainant PRAYER :-Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.59 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Karthick, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar, Counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side) 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.14428 of 2026 ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused No.5, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 12.06.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66D of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 in Crime No.59 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was acquainted with one Mohammed Hakim, who allegedly impersonated a Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Officer. It is alleged that the said Mohammed Hakim placed the defacto complainant under a so-called "digital arrest" and induced him to part with a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- on the false pretext that the credentials of the defacto complainant were linked to a money laundering case. Believing the representations made by the accused, the defacto complainant transferred the said amount through various bank accounts, including those of A1 and A2. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not derived any substantial benefit from the alleged transactions. It was contended that, without being aware of the 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.14428 of 2026 consequences, the petitioner had merely assisted his friends. It was further submitted that the principal accused, namely, Mohammed Hakim, who allegedly impersonated a Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Officer, is still absconding. The learned counsel also submitted that the first-layer bank account holders, through whose accounts the defrauded money was initially transferred, have already been arrested and released on bail after depositing the amounts received by them. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. It was also submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 12.06.2026 and is ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, the learned counsel prayed for the grant of bail to the petitioner. 4. The learned Counsel for the State (Criminal Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that A1 and A2 were arrested and that, during the course of investigation, it came to light that the present petitioner had handed over the credentials of the defacto complainant to 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.14428 of 2026 A1, namely, Mohammed Hakim. It was further submitted that, by using the Aadhaar card, bank account details and other personal credentials of the defacto complainant, the accused persons fraudulently transferred the funds through the bank accounts of A1 and A2 and thereafter siphoned off the same. He further submitted that the investigation is still in progress and opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner. 5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the nature of the allegations, the fact that the petitioner is not alleged to have substantially benefited from the transactions, the fact that certain co-accused who had received the money have already been granted bail and also considering the fact that there are no previous case against the petitioner and also taking into account the period of incarceration already undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to certain conditions. [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs. 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.14428 of 2026 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Thanjavur, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks, thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected; [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.14428 of 2026 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 51730]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS. 21.07.2026 pal To 1.The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Thanjavur. 2.The Officer-in-Charge, Sub-Jail, Thanjavur. 3.The Inspector of Police, CCD-III Police Station, Thanjavur District. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.14428 of 2026 K.RAJASEKAR ,J. pal ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.14428 of 2026 Date : 21.07.2026 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis