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.

Clinton.R Vs The State represented by The Inspector of Police

Clinton.R vs The State represented by The Inspector of Police

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Apr 30, 2026
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1453085

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/11322/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Clinton.R

Respondent

The State represented by The Inspector of Police

Excerpt

.....2023 (section 406, 420 and 506 of indian penal code, 1860) in crime no.87 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. page1 of 5 2.the case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was involved in a financial transaction with the defacto complainant and based on the complaint, fir was registered and the petitioner was arrested and remanded on 12.03.2026.3. the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that thepetitioner is innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. the learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner has already repaid a sum of rs.17 lakhs and is ready to deposit a reasonable amount as may be fixed by this court. it is also submitted that the petitioner is a permanent resident and will not abscond. hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.4. the learned government advocate (crl. side) appearing for therespondent submitted that the petitioner has cheated the defacto complainant in the guise of business transaction. hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.5. heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.6. considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature ofallegations, submissions made by the learned counsels on either side and the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this court is inclined to page2 of 5 grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.7. accordingly, the petitioner shall deposit a sum of rs.5,00,000/-(rupees five lakhs only) to the credit of crime no.87 of 2026 and on such deposit, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a 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 learned judicial magistrate court at pallavaram 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.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN Clinton.R ..Petitioner Vs The State, represented by The Inspector of Police, T-3, Pallavaram Police Station, Tambaram District - 600 043. ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant bail to the Petitioner in Crime No.87 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police and direct that the Petitioner be released on bail on such terms and conditions as this Court. For Petitioner: Mr.Lakshmi Raja For Respondent: Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 12.03.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 351(2) of of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Section 406, 420 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860) in Crime No.87 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. Page1 of 5 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was involved in a financial transaction with the defacto complainant and based on the complaint, FIR was registered and the petitioner was arrested and remanded on 12.03.2026.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner is innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner has already repaid a sum of Rs.17 lakhs and is ready to deposit a reasonable amount as may be fixed by this Court. It is also submitted that the petitioner is a permanent resident and will not abscond. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the

respondent submitted that the petitioner has cheated the defacto complainant in the guise of business transaction. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of

allegations, submissions made by the learned counsels on either side and the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to Page2 of 5 grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-

(Rupees Five Lakhs only) to the credit of Crime No.87 of 2026 and on such deposit, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a 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 learned Judicial Magistrate Court at Pallavaram 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 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 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 take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions had been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court itself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of

Page3 of 5 Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283]; [f] if the petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 30-04-2026 NSL To Note:

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official

Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code. To

1. The Judicial Magistrate Court at Pallavaram.

2. The Central Prison -2, Puzhal.

3. The Inspector of Police, T-3, Pallavaram Police Station, Tambaram District - 600 043.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Page4 of 5

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

NSL 30-04-2026 Page5 of 5

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial