M.Thinesh Mariathason Dalton v. The State Rep by the Inspector of Police

Order The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

03.02.2026 for the alleged offence under Sections 409 and 420 of IPC (316(5) and 318(4) of BNS) in Crime No.203 of 2019 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. Page2 of 4

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused cheated the de facto complainant and others in the name of online investment trading company to the tune of Rs.15 crores. Hence, this case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is also a victim of the company and has suffered a huge loss by investing in the company. He further submitted that wife of the petitioner is ill and A2 and A3 have already been released on bail. He submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the Petitioner.

¶4At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) strongly oppose the bail application on the ground that the FIR was registered in the year 2019 and the petitioner was absconding from India. Only upon issuance of an LOC, the respondent police was able to secure the petitioner on 05.02.2026. There is every possibility of flight risk and the total cheated amount is around Rs.14 crores. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner.

¶5I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record. Page3 of 4

¶6From the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and taking into consideration, the submission of the learned Govt Advocate (Crl.side), more specifically on the ground that the case pertains to the year 2019, the petitioner could not be secured until 05.02.2026 and the petitioner was arrested only upon issuance of LOC and he is not a resident of India and he hide himself in Indonesia. As rightly contended by the learned Govt Advocate (Crl.Side) the petitioner is a person of flight risk. Hence this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. This Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

23.03.2026 SHL To:

¶1The CCB and CBCID Court, Egmore.

¶2The Inspector of Police, CCB-1, EDF-III, Beta-7A Central Crime Branch, Vepery, Chennai-600 007

¶3The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras CRLoOPoNo.o7273oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPANoJ. SHL CRLoOPoNo.o7273oofo2026

23.03.2026 Page4oofo4

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23.03.2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN M.Thinesh Mariathoson Dalton ..Petitioner Vs The State rep by The Inspector of Police, CCB-1, EDF-III, Beta-7A Central Crime Branch, Vepery, Chennai-600 007 ..Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.203 of 2019 on the file of respondent. For Petitioner: Mr.R.Swarnavel For Respondent: Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)