Prem Arul Raj v. The State Rep.By, the Inspector of Police,

ORDER The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 406 and 420 of IPC in connection with the case in Crime No.661 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail. Page2 of 6

¶2The allegation against the petitioner is that he, along with other co-accused, induced the de-facto complainant with a false promise of securing a government job for the defacto complainant's daughter as a Nurse in the Health Department. On the strength of this promise, the petitioner allegedly received a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs only) in two instalments. However, the petitioner neither secured the employment as promised nor returned the money. It is further alleged that when the complainant sought for a refund of the amount, the petitioner and other accused threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences. Hence, the case was registered.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He contends that the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen with no prior antecedents and is willing to cooperate fully with the investigation. He further submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that this Court may deem fit to impose. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. She submitted that there are specific overt acts attributed to the petitioner regarding the collection of a huge sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- under the guise of job Page3 of 6 racketeering. She further emphasized that the investigation is at a nascent stage, no recovery has been effected so far, and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is essential.

¶5This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the records. The allegations involve a serious offence of job racketeering, where the petitioner is alleged to have swindled a substantial amount from an innocent job seeker. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the specific overt acts attributed to the petitioner, the quantum of money involved (Rs. 7,00,000/-), and the fact that the investigation is still pending, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶6Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 03-02-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order JAI Page4 of 6 To

¶1TheInspector of Police, T12, Poonamallee Police Station, Chennai - 600 056.

¶2The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Page5 of 6

K.RAJASEKAR, J. JAI CRL OP No. 727 of 2026 03-02-2026 Page6 of 6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 03-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL OP No. 727 of 2026 Prem Arul Raj ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, T12, Poonamallee Police Station, Chennai - 600 056. Cr.No.661 of 2025. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on Anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in Cr.No.661 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent. For Petitioner(s): Mr.K Rahul For Respondent(s): Ms.J.R.Archana, GA (Crl.side)