K B Jeya Murugan v. State Represented by

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 08.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN K.B.Jeya Murugan ... Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.12031 of 2026

1.R.Sivaraman

2.Sugadev Nagendran Palani ... Petitioners in Crl.O.P.No.12095 of 2026 Vs. The State Represented by, The Inspector of Police, CCB-1, EDF-III, Chennai. (Crime No.228 of 2025) ... Respondent in both Crl.O.Ps' COMMON PRAYER: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.228 of 2025 on the file of respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Muthukumar in Crl.O.P.No.12031 of 2026 For Petitioner : Mr.S.Velmurugan in Crl.O.P.No.12095 of 2026 For Intervenor : Mr.G.Karthikeyan in both Crl.O.Ps' For Respondent : Mr.N.Palanivel, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) in both Crl.O.Ps' COMMON ORDER The petitioner/A8 in Crl.O.P.No.12031 of 2026, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 34 of the IPC, in Crime No.228 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The petitioners/A9 and A10 in Crl.O.P.No.12095 of 2026, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 34 of the IPC, in Crime No.228 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that these petitioners are arrayed as A8, A9 and A10 and they were not named as accused in the FIR, which was registered on 23.12.2025. He submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case solely on the ground that a certain amount was transacted through their bank accounts. Therefore, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶4The learned counsel for the intervenor strongly opposed the grant of anticipatory bail and submitted that although these petitioners were not initially named as accused, during the course of the investigation, it came to light that a huge sum, totalling Rs.5.78 crores, had been transacted into the bank accounts of these petitioners, and these amounts were subsequently transferred to the company account. Therefore, it was argued that unless the petitioners are taken into custody, the question of unearthing the full extent of the financial transactions and the underlying facts cannot be effectively addressed. Apart from that, the learned counsel for the intervenor further submitted that the petitioners have got previous cases.

¶5The said contention was reiterated by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police. He submitted that though the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that a certain amount had been disbursed, it is clear from the submissions made by the learned counsel for the intervenor that a whopping sum of Rs.14,33,74,326/- is due and that these amounts have been transacted through the accounts of these petitioners. He further submitted that though the petitioners would contend that all the amounts had been again re-transferred, they are not in a position to substantiate the same either before the Investigating Officer or before this Court. Apart from that, these petitioners have got previous cases and therefore, they are prone to recidivism.

¶6In view of the above circumstances, and as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the intervenor as well as the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), this Court is of the firm view that unless the petitioners are taken into custody, the layering of the money cannot be identified. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶7Accordingly, these Criminal Original Petitions stand dismissed.

08.07.2026 cda To

1.The Inspector of Police, CCB-1, EDF-III, Chennai.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J. cda

08.07.2026