Senthil Kumar G v. The State Rep By, the Inspector of Police

O R D E R The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 120B and 420 of IPC, in Crime No.2 of 2024, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is running M/s. Seea Horse Consultancy and he made the investors deposit in the said Company by making false promises, and received a sum of Rs.1,25,50,000/- from the de facto complainant and her family members, and returned only a sum of Rs.26,33,620/- through bank transactions. In spite of repeated demands, the Company has not returned the balance amount to her and other depositors. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that according to the prosecution case, the petitioner received Rs.1.25 Crores from the de facto complainant for high returns, however, he has cheated them. Even according to the allegations in the FIR, the occurrence took place between 2022-2023, however, the complaint came to be registered only on 21.03.2024. It is also the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that except for this petitioner, the other accused persons were enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.Nos.9773 & 9884 of 2024, dated 29.04.2024, and they also deposited a sum of Rs.20 Lakhs to the credit of Crime No.2 of 2024.

¶4The learned counsel for the intervener vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, submitting that unless the petitioner is taken into custody, it would become very difficult to unearth the layering of the money.

¶5The said contention was reiterated by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police.

¶6While considering the factual position that the occurrence took place between 2022-2023 and the FIR came to be registered on 21.03.2024, and in the meanwhile, other accused persons were already enlarged on anticipatory bail and Rs.20 Lakhs has already been deposited by some other accused; in such view of the circumstances, this Court is of the firm view that, at this length of time, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner voluntarily undertakes to pay a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- as a non-refundable deposit to the credit of Crime No.2 of 2024, without prejudice to his defence.

¶7Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Katpadi, Vellore District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a 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 petitioner 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 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 petitioner shall make a non-refundable deposit of Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs only) to the credit of Crime No.02 of 2024. On such deposit, the de facto complainant is entitled to withdraw the same by filing an appropriate application, in line with the order passed in Crl.O.P.Nos.9773 and 9884 of 2024, dated

29.04.2024;

(d) If the said amount is not deposited within a period of four weeks from the date of uploading of this order, the anticipatory bail granted by this Court shall stand automatically cancelled without any further reference to this Court;

(e) 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 interrogation;

(f) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner 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];

(g) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

20.07.2026 cda

C.KUMARAPPAN, J. cda To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Katpadi, Vellore District.

2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Vellore District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

20.07.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 20.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Senthil Kumar ... Petitioner Vs. The State Represented by, The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Vellore District. (Crime No.2 of 2024) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.2 of 2024 on the file of respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.Arun Kumar For Intervener : Mr.E.Kannadasan For Respondent : Mr.N.Palanivel, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)