Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Ezhilarasan Vs The State Rep. by

Ezhilarasan vs The State Rep. by

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jan 29, 2026
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1416118

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
CRL OP/1504/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ezhilarasan

Respondent

The State Rep. by

Excerpt

.....personal account. further, the petitioner also colluded with the other accused, and so far investigation revealed that rs.8.86 crores has been swindled and cheated 46 victims. though it is submitted that investigation is concluded, further investigation is going on regarding the money trail. in such view of the matter, if the petitioner is released on bail, further investigation would be affected, and he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.5. it is stated that the petitioner is in incarceration for a long period, i.e.,from 25.08.2025, and the money involved in this case is to the extent of 20 crores, further, the money trail is under probe, and so far no money is recovered. further, after elaborately considering the overt acts of the similarly placed director, this court has dismissed the bail application in crl.op. no.34496 of 2025, vide order dated 19.12.2025. considering the above facts, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. 29-01-2026 mpa index:yes/nospeaking/non-speaking orderinternet:yes neutral citation:yes/no to 1.the state rep. by the inspector of police, eow, thiruvallur police station, crime no.3 of 2025 2.the public prosecutor high court, madras. k.rajasekar j. mpa crl op no. 1504 of 29-01-2026

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29-01-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. Ezhilarasan S/o. Anbalagan, Old no.1. 208 New No.1/260, Ambethkar Nagar, Ramathandalam, Tiruvallur -602 021 Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The State Rep. by

The Inspector of Police, EOW, Thiruvallur Police Station, Crime No.3 of 2025 Respondent(s) PRAYER to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.3 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police and thus render justice For Petitioner(s): M/s.Santhoshkumar Ravi For Respondent(s): Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 25.08.2025, for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 120B, 420 of IPC and 5 of TN Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishment) Act, 1997, and 3 & 5 of TN Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act 2019 (BUDS Act 2019) in Crime No.3 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is ranked as

A1 in this case; A1 to A4 are the companies floated by this petitioner. Through the companies they floated, various schemes including Gold Fund Scheme, they collected huge amounts to the extent of Rs.20 crores, were collected with a promise of paying good profit, but failed to return back sum of Rs.8.86 crores to the depositors. Hence, the complaint was lodged and the petitioner was arrested. Now the investigation is also concluded and the final report is also filed.

3.(a) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was ranked as A5, prior to the arrest, the petitioner was abducted by unknown persons and thereafter he was released, and the next day, the police also arrested the petitioner. The petitioner is in incarceration from 25.08.2025. He further submitted that it is alleged that the petitioner has collected the money and invested in proper trading firms. Since there was a loss sustained, no income has been generated and the petitioner is not in a position to return back the money to the depositors. He further submitted that the victims were also aware about the risk involved in this investment made, and the same has been suppressed at the time of filing the complaint.

(b) He further relied on the judgement of Subhelal@ Sushil Sahu versus

The State of Chhattisgarh reported in 2025 INSC 242 and submitted that there is no valid ground to detain the petitioner since the investigation is concluded, and even if he is released on bail, he will not abscond or tamper with the witnesses and is ready to cooperate with the trial process. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent

police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the investigation revealed that this petitioner has collected nearly twenty crores by using four bank accounts; two in the name of the two companies; and two in the name of the petitioner's personal account. Further, the petitioner also colluded with the other accused, and so far investigation revealed that Rs.8.86 crores has been swindled and cheated 46 victims. Though it is submitted that investigation is concluded, further investigation is going on regarding the money trail. In such view of the matter, if the petitioner is released on bail, further investigation would be affected, and he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. It is stated that the petitioner is in incarceration for a long period, i.e.,

from 25.08.2025, and the money involved in this case is to the extent of 20 crores, further, the money trail is under probe, and so far no money is recovered. Further, after elaborately considering the overt acts of the similarly placed director, this Court has dismissed the bail application in Crl.OP. No.34496 of 2025, vide order dated 19.12.2025. Considering the above facts, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. 29-01-2026 Mpa Index:Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No To 1.The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, EOW, Thiruvallur Police Station, Crime No.3 of 2025 2.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras. K.RAJASEKAR J. mpa CRL OP No. 1504 of 29-01-2026

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial