Dinesh v. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 16.07.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD)No.14513 of 2026 Dinesh ... Petitioner/Accused No.2 Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Sivagangai Town Police Station, Sivagangai District. (Crime No.717 of 2024) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vinodh

For Respondent : Mr.D.Venkatesh Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :-

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.717/2024 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Section 406 and 420 of IPC, in Crime No.717 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The allegation against the petitioner is that the defacto complainant is a retired government employee. He purchased the TATA TIAGO car bearing registration No.TN 57 BZ 9211 by way of availing loan from the private bank, agreed to pay monthly installment. Due to his financial distress, he was not in position to settle the monthly installment. He decided to settle the loan amount by selling the car. Hence, the defacto complaint approached the petitioner, who is working as collection agent in the bank and he expressed his willingness to sell the car. Accordingly, the petitioner introduced A1 to the defacto complainant and on 21.09.2022 about 11.00 A.M, A1 entered into a sale agreement with the defacto complainant for a sale consideration of sum of Rs.3,00,000/- and paid a sum of Rs.15,000/- as advance. In respect of remaining amount of Rs.2,85,000/-, A1 assured to pay the same on or before 15.10.2022. The petitioner and A1 failed to settle the remaining amount and cheated the defacto complainant. Hence, the case has been registered.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and is no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that the co-accused deposited the remaining sale consideration of Rs.2,85,000/- before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Sivagangai and he was granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD).No. 23177 of 2025, by order dated 21.01.2026. He also submitted that the petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation and prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned counsel for State (Crl. Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the offences committed by the accused are grave in nature. He further submitted that the investigation is pending and opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He also submitted that the total amount involved is Rs.2,85,000/- and that the co-accused/A1 had deposited the same before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Sivagangai and he was granted anticipatory bail by this Court.

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

¶6Considering the rival submissions on either side and the fact that the co-accused had already deposited the remaining sale consideration and he was released on bail and that the petitioner had only introduced A1 to the defacto complainant, I am of the view that custodial interrogation is not necessary in this case and hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Sivagangai, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner 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 the interrogation. [c] the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation. [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.

16.07.2026 Lm TO

1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Sivagangai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Sivagangai Town Police Station, Sivagangai District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. K.RAJASEKAR,J. Lm ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.14513 of 2026 Date : 16.07.2026