High Court · 2025

Crl.OP.No. 34240 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18.12.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKARCRL OP Nos. 34240 and 33706 of 20251.P.Ravi Kumar ... Petitioner[in Crl.O.P.No. 34240/2025]2.Mangayarkarasi @ Managaikarasy...Petitioner /A4[in Crl.O.P.No. 33706/2025]VsThe State rep. by The Inspector of PoliceDistrict Crime Branch, (DCB)PerambalurCrime No. 36 of 2025....Respondent[in both petitions]COMMON PRAYER : Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest pending investigation in Crime No.36 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.For Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.34240/2025: Mr.N.AnandanFor Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.33706/2025: Mr.Sasikumar LakshmipathyFor Intervener in both petitions: Mr.S.SelvakumarFor Respondent in both petitions: Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Criminal Side)----1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 34240 of 2025 COMMON ORDERThe petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420 and 506(1) of IPC in Crime No.36 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were involved in real estate business and they have come forward to collect money from the de-facto complainant herein and to invest the same for various real estate business and subsequently, they have also paid some amount with interest and thereafter, defaulted to repay the money. Hence, the complaint was lodged against the petitioners. 3.The learned Counsel for the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No. 33706 of 2025 submits that the petitioner is ranked as A4 in this case and it is alleged that the petitioner is said to have received a sum of Rs.44,00,000/- from the de-facto complainant and failed to return back the money. Based on the calculation, the petitioners are ready to pay a sum of Rs.43,00,000/- to the de-facto complainant in this case, and it is a case of improper accounting. 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 34240 of 2025He further submits that the petitioner is ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court and he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.4.The learned Counsel for the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.34240/2025 submits that the petitioner is ranked as A5 in this case. It is alleged that the petitioner collected only a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from the de-facto complainant and failed to return back the money. He further submits that the money was not given directly to the petitioner and it was A1 who is used the petitioner’s name, and he has not collected any money from the de-facto complainant as alleged by the prosecution. He further submits that the petitioner is ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court and he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.5.Mr.S.Selvakumar, learned Counsel for the Intervener/De-facto complainant submits that these petitioners are Group Associates. However, in the real estate business, they have induced the de-facto complainant with promises of huge profits, and accordingly, they have collected a sum of Rs.1.83 Crore. A4 alone gradually collected a sum of Rs.44,00,000/-, and A5 collected only a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-. They have also provided 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 34240 of 2025documentation to show that they have acknowledged receipt of the money and promised to repay the same. He relied on the undertaking letter given by the petitioners and also on some blank cheques that were issued by the petitioners. He further submits that the petitioners have cheated the de-facto complainant of a huge amount and opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.6.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent, reiterated the prosecution case and submits that totally six accused involved in this case, the petitioners are ranked as A4 and A5. He further submits that investigation is pending. He opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.7.I have also gone through the FIR and other connected materials, which reveal that the petitioners induced the de-facto complainant to pay a huge amount as investment in the real estate business. It is also revealed that there was some properties registered in the name of the de-facto complainant. It is also admitted between the parties that some portion of the amount was returned back. As far as A4, the petitioner, is concerned, it is alleged that the entire money has been repaid, whereas, the bank statement 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 34240 of 2025has also been produced to the extent of Rs.22,00,000/- and remaining amount has been paid by way of cash not bay way of bank accounts. Though it seems that there were transactions involving huge amount between the parties, and undertaking letters were executed, and some documentations were made regarding the transactions between the parties, I am of the view that this is a case with criminal colour, and the petitioners shall resort to a proper remedy to recover the money.6.Accordingly, the petitioner is 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 Judicial Magistrate No.I, Perambalur District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:(a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 34240 of 2025[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 three 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 petitioners in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court themselves 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 absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.18.12.2025MSM6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 34240 of 2025To1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Perambalur District.2.The Inspector of PoliceDistrict Crime Branch, (DCB)Perambalur, Crime No. 36 of 2025.3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 34240 of 2025K.RAJASEKAR , J. MSMCRL OP Nos. 34240 and 33706 of 202518.12.2025.8/7