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

O R D E R The petitioner who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of BNS in Crime No.131 of 2026, seek anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is a former Archbishop of Madras and he is conducting a Trust for Integral Development and Educational Services and for the said trust, land was to be purchased and the petitioner being a Church priest was entrusted with the purchase of land for the trust and he received totaling a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- for purchase of land, however, after receiving the amount, petitioner neither purchased the land nor returned the money.. Hence, the case

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reiterated the prosecution case and opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶5The learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant submitted that the petitioner had caused a loss of Rs.20,00,000/- to the defacto complainant's trust. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶6Considering the above facts and circumstances that the dispute is civil in nature, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶7Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tambaram, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a separate 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity. [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 interrogation. [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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]. [f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

30.04.2026 Sma To

¶1Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tambaram

¶2The Inspector of Police, T6, Peerkankaranai Police Station, Chennai – 600 063

¶3. The Public Prosecutor,

High Court of Madras. G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

.,J.

Sma

30.04.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30.04.2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN S.Daniel ... Petitioner Vs. The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, T6, Peerkankaranai Police Station, Chennai – 600 063 (Crime No.131 of 2026). ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in connection with Crime No.131 of 2026, pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.Maria Joseph David For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhilpeean Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For Intervenor : Mr.P.R.Narayanan