High Court · 2025

Crl.O.P.Nos.29409 and 29606 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11-12-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K. RAJASEKARCRL OP NOS.29409 and 29606 of 2025and CRL MP NOS.23253 and 23481 of 2025Nagaraj @ Lakavathu Nagaraju ... Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.29409 of 2025/ A2Rathika @ Radhika ... Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.29606 of 2025/ A1VsThe State Rep. By,The Inspector of Police,K-4, Anna Nagar Police Station,Chennai.(Crime No.1022 of 2025)... Respondent/ Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioners herein on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent in Crime No.1022 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.For Petitioners : Mr. Swami SubramanianFor Respondent : M/s. J.R. Archana Government Advocate (Crl.Side)******1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.Nos.29409 and 29606 of 2025O R D E RThe petitioners herein, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 316(5) of BNS in Crime No.1022 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.2. The allegation against the petitioners herein is that, they are the Chief Manager and Assistant Manager of the Indian Overseas Bank, Anna Nagar Branch, Chennai; that the bank locker bearing No.050226 in the aforesaid bank was initially availed by one Palani and his wife Lalitha Palani in the year 2014; that subsequently they opened another bank locker bearing No.050239 in the year 2019, hence they decided to surrender the earlier availed locker bearing No.050226 and accordingly the formalities were completed on 27.09.2023; that whileso, the locker rent for the locker bearing No.050226 was deducted from the account of the earlier owner Lalitha Palani, hence she approached the bank seeking clarification; that the bank officials stated that she has not surrender the locker key of the said locker and demanded her to surrender the same; that since she had stated that the locker key gone missing, the bank officials of the said branch had decided to broke open the locker, accordingly they engaged a Godrej staff member and broke open the locker on 04.12.2024 and inside the said locker only one photograph and Rs.10/- was alone found; that the entire event of broke opening the locker was also been video 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.Nos.29409 and 29606 of 2025graphed and subsequently, new key of the said locker bearing No.050226 was handed over to Lalitha Palani; that it is alleged that the said locker bearing No.050226 was allotted to the defacto complainant and his wife on 30.09.2023 along with the key, from thereon, they were using the said locker and also kept some valuables inside the locker; that whileso on 17.02.2025, while the said Lalitha Palani operated the locker bearing No.050226, the entries were updated in the online portal by the bank, thereby the defacto complainant received an automated system generated message in his e-mail regarding the opening of his locker by some other person, hence he approached the bank for enquiry; that only at that point, the defacto complainant came to know that the said locker was broke opened by the bank officials and the same was allotted to some other person, hence the defacto complainant lodged a complaint that his locker was opened without his consent by the bank staff members and his valuables and jewels kept inside the locker were taken away. Hence, this case.3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners herein are bank officials and they followed the due protocols at the time of opening the bank locker and there was some mistake while allotting the bank locker to the defacto complainant herein; that as alleged by the defacto complainant that huge valuables and jewels were kept inside the said locker is a false submission, since the entire event of broke opening the said bank locker by the 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.Nos.29409 and 29606 of 2025bank officials by engaging the authorised Godrej vendor was also video graphed and the same is also produced before the Investigating Officer. He further submitted that the defacto complainant is also working under the petitioners herein in the same branch and due to personal vendetta and to wreck vengeance, the petitioners herein have been roped in this case. He also submitted that Internal Audit Team has also conducted enquiry and a separate proceedings for delegation of duty has also been initiated, however it is not a case of theft or misappropriation of properties; and that the petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and to co-operate for the investigation, hence sought for anticipatory bail to the petitioners.4.The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor raised strong objection for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners herein by stating that the locker was allotted to the defacto complainant and his wife; that thereby, they kept their valuables and jewels inside the locker; that however, the bank officials and other accused had broke open the locker without the defacto complainant's knowledge and taken away the valuables and jewels kept inside the locker, hence submitted that if the petitioners herein were granted anticipatory bail, it would hamper the investigation process. 5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.Nos.29409 and 29606 of 2025respondent police while opposing the anticipatory bail to the petitioners reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that on the basis of the instructions given by this Court, a separate Audit report was also obtained and various persons were also examined and it is revealed that the entire event of opening the bank locker with the help of the authorised Godrej vendor was video graphed and there were no valuables found inside the said locker; and that the investigation of this case is pending. 6. Considering the submissions made, facts and circumstances of this case, nature of allegations levelled, the fact that already Bank Internal Audit Team had conducted enquiry, the break opening of the locker was also video graphed and no property of the defacto complainant is found at the time of opening the said locker and custodial interrogation of the petitioners herein is not necessary for the purpose of investigation in this case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate Court No.V, Egmore, Chennai on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.Nos.29409 and 29606 of 2025each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:[a] if the petitioners fail to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled; [b] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;[c] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30.a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;[d] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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)13 SCC 283];[e] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.Nos.29409 and 29606 of 20258. Accordingly, these criminal original petitions and the connected criminal miscellaneous petitions are ordered. 11.12.2025stnTo1. The Metropolitan Magistrate No.V, Egmore, Chennai.2. The Inspector of Police, K-4, Anna Nagar Police Station, Chennai. (Crime No.1022 of 2025)K. RAJASEKAR, J.stn3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.CRL OP NOS.29409 and 29606 of 2025and CRL MP NOS.23253 and 23481 of 20257/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.Nos.29409 and 29606 of 202511.12.20258/8