CRL OP(MD)No.13947 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 17.07.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD)No.13947 of 2026 Vasudevan ... Petitioner / Sole Accused Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, South Gate Police Station, Madurai District. (Crime No.135 of 2026) ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :-Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.135 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, or on his appearance. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Manikandan For Respondent : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar, Counsel for State of TN (Criminal Side) 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD)No.13947 of 2026 ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest in connection with Crime No.135 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, registered for the offences punishable under Section 420 of IPC, seeks the relief of anticipatory bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was running a finance business, wherein he used to receive gold jewels from customers as security and advance loans on interest. It is alleged that, upon repayment of the loan amount, the pledged jewels were to be returned to the customers. However, in the present case, even after the defacto complainant repaid the loan amount, the petitioner failed to return the pledged gold jewels. Hence, the present case has been registered. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the FIR itself discloses that the gold jewels had been pledged with the petitioner in the year 2022. It was further submitted that, since the defacto complainant had defaulted in repayment of the loan, the pledged jewels were sold in accordance with the terms of the transaction. 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD)No.13947 of 2026 According to the learned counsel, the present complaint has been lodged only after a lapse of about four years, owing to the steep increase in the price of gold. He further submitted that a false case has been foisted against the petitioner. He further submitted that there are no previous cases against the petitioner. He also submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail. 4. Per contra, the learned Counsel for State (Criminal Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that a total of 9.5 sovereigns of gold jewels had been pledged with the petitioner. It was further submitted that, despite the defacto complainant having repaid the loan amount, the petitioner failed to return the pledged gold jewels. Therefore, the defacto complainant was constrained to lodge the present complaint. He also submitted that the petitioner has 3 previous cases. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. 5. This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD)No.13947 of 2026 perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the nature of the allegations and also considering the fact that the alleged transaction pertains to the year 2022, and taking into account the delay in lodging the complaint, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions. 7. 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.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: (a) the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity; 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD)No.13947 of 2026 (b) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of three weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation; (c) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (d) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; (e) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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]; and (f) if the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023. 17.07.2026 pal 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD)No.13947 of 2026 To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Madurai District. 2.The Inspector of Police, South Gate Police Station, Madurai 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.13947 of 2026 K. RAJASEKAR ,J. pal ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.13947 of 2026 Date : 17.07.2026 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis