C.Rajkumar S/O Chinnairulan vs Inspector Of Police

C.Kumarappan, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 30.01.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 61(2) and 318(4) of B.N.S. and Sections 56 and 76(1) of Chit Funds Act in Crime No.1 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with his brother approached defacto complainant and 150 other persons, who were working under the daily wages, at S.R. Bricks Chamber at Coimbatore and induced them to join in their deepavali chit fund at Rs.2,000/- per week for a period of 52 weeks. Accordingly, the victim persons paid the chit amount and the accused, after receipt of money, failed to return the matured chit amount. When the victims asked the accused to return back the money, the accused attacked and threatened them with dire consequences. Hence the case.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is under incarceration since 30.01.2026. It is the further submission of the petitioner that the very prosecution case itself is unbelievable as the defacto complainant, while receiving Rs.300/- as salary, making payment of Rs.2,000/- to the petitioner, is highly impossible. The entire allegation runs against A1and this petitioner, being the brother of A1, has been roped in and hence prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor would strongly oppose the bail application that the poor people’s money has been looted by the accused under the false promise and the defacto complainants are the coolies in the Bricks Chambers and hence if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, it would be difficult to get back their money.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that the total amount cheated by the accused is Rs.62 lakhs and there are about 47 victims.

I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

While looking into the factual position that the petitioner is under incarceration since 30.01.2026, by this time, investigation might have been completed and apart from that, according to the petitioner, the entire allegation is against A1 and hence in such view of the peculiar facts, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, subject to the following stringent conditions:

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Coimbatore and on further conditions that:

[a] 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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall sign before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. and 5.30 p.m. until further orders. No relaxation petition will be entertained for a period of 60 days;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283]:

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.