Dhanush S v. The State Rep. By, the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioners apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 316(4) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, in Crime No.111 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that petitioners along with other accused misappropriated the undelivered products worth Rs.5,66,247/-. Hence, the case. Page2 of 5

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the de facto complainant and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that they are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that defacto complainant is working as Enforcement Officer in Flipcart and the petitioners are working as Team Leaders in a delivery centre. She submits that the petitioners along with other accused misappropriated a sum of Rs.5,66,247/- . She also submits that the alleged un-delivered 22 cell phones are yet to be recovered. She also submits that no previous case is pending against the petitioners. However, she opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

¶6Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, from the submissions made by learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it is seen that the Page3 of 5 petitioners have no criminal antecedents and according to the prosecution case, whenever a product was returned undelivered, the petitioners along with other accused used a fake barcodes and misappropriated the undelivered product. In the present case, the petitioners took 22 cell phones and one airpod worth Rs.5,66,247. Though such allegations were made against them, considering the fact that there is no criminal antecedents against the petitioners, this Court is of the firm view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.

¶7Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai-01 on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate 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 petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned learned 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 Page4 of 5 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 petitioners shall report before the respondent Police, daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioners 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 Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 23-07-2026 NR To:

1.|The VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai-01

¶2The Inspector of Police C3 Seven Wells Police Station, Chennai District-600 001.

¶3The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras CRLoOPoNo.o19592oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. NR CRLoOPoNo.o19592oofo2026 23-07-2026 Page5oofo5

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1. Dhanush S 2. Sadham Hussain. S ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. by, The Inspector of Police C3 Seven Wells Police Station, Chennai District-600 001. Crime No.111 of 2026. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023 to enlarge the Petitioners on Anticipatory Bail pending investigation in Cr.No.111 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. For Petitioner(s): M/S. Philipraj Kumar For Respondent(s): Ms.R.S.Indira Government Advocate (Crl.Side)