Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 27.02.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.4907 of 2026 Dr.A.G.Rajan ... Petitioner Vs. The State Rep by The Inspector of Police, Sholavaram Police Station, Redhills, Chennai-600 067. ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the event of his arrest, in connection with Cr.No.330 of 2024, pending on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Thangaraj For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 506(1) of IPC in Crime No.330 of 2024, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The allegations against the petitioner is that the petitioner is
running hospital in a premises owned by A2 in this case and he has come forward to permit the defacto complainant to set up a pharmacy. During Covid-19 Pandemic, he has agreed to hand over the entire hospital premises to the defacto complainant and collected a sum of Rs.36lakhs. However, he has neither handed over the premises nor returned back the money, which led to the registration of the case. Hence, the present petition for anticipatory bail.
3. Earlier, this Court vide order dated 10.12.2026 in Crl.OP.No.3068
of 2026 dismissed the petition on merits for the following reasons: “5. On perusal of the material, it revealed that, petitioner induced the defacto complainant to part with Rs.37 lakhs with a promise of handing over the hospital along with the equipment and other things, however, he has not repaid the money or not come forward to execute the same and now he colluded with A2, attempted to disposes the defacto complainant from the premises. In view of the same, considering the huge money is involved in this case, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.”
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner once again argued the matter
and submitted that the defacto complainant has already earning a huge income from the properties. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation and hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. However, considering the earlier order passed by this Court, which
revealed that considering the materials on merits and rejected the contentions of the petitioner and dismissed the petition. Now, there is no change of circumstances after the dismissal of the earlier order. Hence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 27.02.2026 Vv To
1. The Inspector of Police, Sholavaram Police Station, Redhills, Chennai-600 067. 2.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.
K.RAJASEKAR, J.
Vv Crl.O.P.No.4907 of 2026 27.02.2026