Shiyam Sundar v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Ocu-Madurai

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 09/04/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Shiyam Sundar ... Petitioner/Accused No.3 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, OCU-Madurai, CBCID-OCU, Madurai. (Crime No. 6/2025). ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.6/2025 on the file of the respondent police For Petitioner : V.Vishnu, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottaichamy, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 468 & 471 of IPC, in Crime No.6 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that when the defacto complainant was working in a stone quarry, he become friends with A1. A1 approached the defacto complainant and stated that he has a Iridium metal and the value of the same is Rs.3 lakh crores and he promised to give him Rs.550 crores and when he was demanding, he should be paid the service charge, stamp duty etc., On believing his words, the defacto complainant gave an amount of Rs.1 crore 80 lakhs from the month of June 2024 till the month of October 2025. Thereafter, he came to know that he was cheated by the petitioner. Hence, this case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and has was falsely implicated in this case and he has no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that the alleged occurrence was took place on 01.06.2024 and FIR was registered on 15.10.2025 and the petitioner filed an undertaking affidavit that he is ready to pay the amount of Rs.10 lakh in crime number. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner and other accused cheated the amount of Rs.1 crore 80 lakhs by creating fake OTP and RBI seal and arranging meeting in five star hotels at Delhi, Mumbai, Goa, Chennai and Bengaluru. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶5Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶6Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, and the alleged occurrence took place on 01.06.2024 and FIR was registered on 15.10.2025 and no previous case is pending against the petitioner and taking into consideration of the undertaking affidavit filed by the petitioner that he is ready to deposit a sum of Rs.10 lakh in Crime No.6 of 2025, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.4, Madurai, and on further conditions that: [b] The petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten lakhs only) to the credit of Crime No.6 of 2025 without prejudice to his contentions and rights before the trial Court with in a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the learned Judicial Magistrate shall accept the sureties furnished by the petitioner. After receipt of the entire amount, the learned Judicial Magistrate shall deposit the said amount in an interest bearing Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized Bank until the final order/judgment is passed in the case in the said crime number. The learned Judicial Magistrate or trial Court shall pass orders regarding entitlement of the said amount in its final order/judgment; ]c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, every Saturday at 10.30 a.m until further orders. [d] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [f] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [g] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [h] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

09.04.2026 dss P. DHANABAL,J DSS

To

1.The Judicial Magistrate No.4, Madurai.

2.The Inspector of Police, OCU-Madurai, CBCID-OCU, Madurai.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.2382 of 2026 Date : 09/04/2026