High Court · 2025

CRL OP(MD).No.11741 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 29/07/2025PRESENTThe HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAICRL OP(MD).No.11741 of 2025andCRL MP(MD).No.9526 of 2025K.Ganapathi Raja,S/o.Kamaraj Nadar .. Petitioner/A1 VsThe State of Tamilnadu rep.by The Sub Inspector of Police,CCB Unit – III,Madurai City.(Crime No.16 of 2025) .. Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.N.Thamimulansari, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.Thanga Aravindh.B, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.11741 of 2025 For Intervenor : Mr.G.Arunprasath, AdvocatePETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSSPRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.16 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.ORDER : This Court made the following order :- The petitioner/A1, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on03.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 3(5) and 318(4) of BNS, 2023 inCrime No.16 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant, who is a practisingadvocate, was introduced to the petitioner through one Yadvik. The petitionerapproached the de-facto complainant, representing that he had mortgaged certainproperties situated in Thirumangalam and Alanganallur, Madurai, and, in order toredeem the same, requested a sum of Rs.1,70,00,000/- from the de-factocomplainant, assuring that he would repay the amount within two months. Basedon this assurance, the de-facto complainant paid the said amount partly throughbank transfer and partly in cash. Thereafter, the petitioner repaid a sum ofRs.1,10,00,000/-, but failed to return the remaining amount. Subsequently, herequested an additional sum of Rs.40,00,000/- and Rs.10,00,000/-, claiming that he2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.11741 of 2025was setting up a departmental store business and would repay the total amountshortly. Later, on 08.01.2025, the petitioner, along with his wife, foster father, andmother, induced the de-facto complainant to pay another sum of Rs.20,00,000/-,offering to mortgage another property and settle the total dues ofRs.1,30,00,000/- in one instalment. However, it is alleged that the petitioner, alongwith his family members, misappropriated the funds of the de-facto complainantunder false assurances and failed to repay the same. Hence, the present case.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is aninnocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Infact, the de-facto complainant introduced himself as a Legal Advisor for severalfinance companies and in that capacity, he facilitated loans for the petitionerthrough various third parties. At the time of availing such financial assistance, thede-facto complainant demanded blank signed papers and other documents assecurity, and the petitioner and his family members were compelled to provide thesame. He submitted that the de-facto complainant charged exorbitant interest andmisused the blank papers to fabricate a false complaint, with an intention to grab thevaluable property of the petitioner. He also submitted that the de-facto complainantacted merely as a middleman in arranging the loans, and no loan amount was3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.11741 of 2025transferred from the de-facto complainant’s personal bank account to thepetitioner’s account. The loans arranged by the de-facto complainant from privatefinance companies have been regularly repaid by the petitioner. He furthersubmitted that A2 and A3 were arrested and subsequently released on bail by theconcerned Judicial Magistrate, and A4 has been granted anticipatory bail by thelearned Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai on 09.06.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.2314 of 2025.He, however, submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by anyconditions that may be imposed by this Court. He also submitted that the petitionerhas been in custody from 03.06.2025. Hence, he seeks bail for the petitioner.4. The learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that the petitioner is ahabitual offender, with more than seven previous cases registered against him. Hesubmitted that the de-facto complainant has approached the petitioner and hisfamily members/A1 to A4, requesting them to repay the loan amount ofRs.1,30,00,000/-, but they did not take any steps to settle the same. The de-factocomplainant had borrowed the said sum from various individuals in order to helpthe petitioner and his family members. As all the creditors began pressurising thede-facto complainant for repayment, he was left with no option but to mortgage hisown property with Axis Bank, Madurai, for a sum of Rs.1,45,00,000/-, received theloan amount, and settled the creditors. Later, the de-facto complainant came to4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.11741 of 2025know that the accused persons had approached him only with an intention to cheatand swindle the amount of Rs.1,30,00,000/-. He further submitted that theinvestigation in this case is still at an initial stage and so far, no amount has beenrecovered from the petitioner. If the petitioner is released on bail, there is apossibility that he may tamper with witnesses and destroy evidence. Hence, hestrongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that thepetitioner has been arrayed as A1 in this case. A2 and A3 were arrested andsubsequently released on bail. A4 has been granted anticipatory bail by the learnedPrincipal Sessions Judge, Madurai on 09.06.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.2314 of 2025. Hesubmitted that the petitioner, along with his family members, misappropriated thefunds of the de-facto complainant under false assurances and failed to repay a sumof Rs.1,30,00,000/-. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.6. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, andtaking note of the fact that the petitioner was remanded to judicial custody on03.06.2025, and that two of the co-accused were arrested and subsequently releasedon bail, and one of the co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail, and that theevidence are based on records and pertains to a monetary transaction between theparties, and that as the date of registration of FIR is 06.05.2025, by this time most of5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.11741 of 2025the investigation might have been completed, and also considering the period ofincarceration already undergone by the petitioner, this court is inclined to grant bailto the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: 7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing abond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with twosureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial MagistrateNo.I, Madurai and on further conditions that :- [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in thesurety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank passBook to ensure their identity;[b] the petitioner shall furnish his residential address and contact number tothe learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai. If the petitioner changes hisresidential address, he shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I,Madurai;[c] the petitioner shall appear and sign before the respondent police dailytwice i.e. at 10.00 a.m. and 05.00 p.m. until further orders; [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either duringinvestigation or trial;6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.11741 of 2025[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/TrialCourt is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance withlaw as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by thelearned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Courtin P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]; and;[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered underSection 269 of BNS.8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, theconnected Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is closed. sd/- 29/07/2025 / TRUE COPY / /07/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.-I/ II /III/ IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. mknTO1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai.7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.11741 of 20252. Do through the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai.3.The Officer In Charge, District Jail, Virudhunagar. 4.The Sub Inspector of Police, CCB Unit – III, Madurai City. 5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.11741 of 2025 Date :29/07/2025 PS/SAR.30.07.2025 8P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 8/8