J.Babu v. State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioner/A3, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 120B, 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 296(b), 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Page2 of 6 Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.34 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The allegation against the petitioner/A3 is that the petitioner has misappropriated a sum of Rs.29,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Nine Lakhs Only) from the de-facto complainant by way of Demand Draft bearing No.254740. Hence, the case.

¶3Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent.

¶4The learned counsel for the petitioner/A3 would submit that the FIR was registered against the petitioner on 28.11.2025. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that this petitioner advanced a loan to the de-facto complainant's husband in the year 2015, and thereafter, the de-facto complainant and her husband had matrimonial discord and got divorced. In furtherance of their matrimonial discord, the de-facto complainant's husband had executed a Settlement Deed in favour of the de-facto complainant in respect of the land, and according to the prosecution, this petitioner/A3, along with the other accused have deceived the de-facto complainant and thereby received the entire sale consideration in the year of 2016. Page3 of 6

¶5The learned counsel would submit that except for the overt act of 2016, there are no current allegations against this petitioner. However, the present FIR came to be registered in furtherance of the direction of this Court in Crl.R.C.No.2067 of 2025 on 24.10.2025. Hence, it is the submission that there is no custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required.

¶6The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent though objected the anticipatory bail application and would submit that except for the Demand Draft bearing No.254740 for Rs.29,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakhs Only), there are no documents submitted by the de-facto complainant in respect of the remaining alleged amount cheated by this petitioner/A3 and the other accused. He would further submit that even according to the averments made in the FIR, those amounts had been received by the petitioner by cash.

¶7From the submissions made by either side, it is amply clear that the alleged occurrence took place during 2016 and that the alleged sale also took place during 2016. Therefore, this Court is of the firm view that at this length of time, no custodial interrogation of the petitioner/A3 is required. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions: Page4 of 6

¶8Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VII, Coimbatore, 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 conditions:

(a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a 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 identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent police, twice a day at 10.30 a.m., and 5.30 p.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for the interrogation;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Page5 of 6 Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 09-04-2026 dk To

¶1The Judicial Magistrate – VII, Coimbatore.

¶2The Inspector of Police, City Crime Branch, Coimbatore 641 014.

¶3The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras. CRLoOPoNo.8573oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. dk CRLoOPoNo.o8573oofo2026 09-04-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 8573 of 2026 J.Babu S/o. John David Door No. 95, Dhanaas Vrikshaa Nadupalayam Road, Pattanam, Coimbatore 641 016. ...Petitioner/A3 Vs State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Inspector of Police. City Crime Branch, Coimbatore 641 014. ...Respondent/ Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.34 of 2025 dated 28.11.2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, City Crime Branch, Coimbatore. For Petitioner: Mr.S.Manuraj For Respondent: Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)