Megala vs Rajesh

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Mar 30, 2026

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1493222

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1493222
Court: Chennai Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice C.Kumarappan
Decided On: Mar 30, 2026
Case Number: CRL MP/20488/2025

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Megala

Respondent

Rajesh

Excerpt

.....based upon the submissions made by the learned government advocate, this court recorded that rs.3,40,00,000/- was the amount allegedly cheated, of which rs.3 crore had been recovered. it is, therefore, contended that the question of suppression of facts does not arise, and the court, while granting bail, had considered all relevant aspects. hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the said order.3. at this juncture, the learned government advocate (crl.side) forrespondents 3 and 4 would submit that he has already filed an application for cancellation of bail on the ground that the respondents 1 and 2 are not page3 of 6 cooperating with the trial and is in violation of the conditions imposed by this court in the bail order. however, the said application is still pending, due the pendency of another application before this court for cancellation of bail.4. i have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.5. admittedly, no ground has been raised by the petitioner to show any violation of the bail conditions. however, it is the submission of the petitioner that certain facts were not considered by this court while granting bail.6. as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the factsthat were germane at that point of time namely, that the amount allegedly cheated was rs. 3,40,00,000/- and the amount recovered was rs. 3 crore were duly considered by this court. therefore, the question of non-consideration of material facts does not arise in this case. consequently, this court does not find any ground to cancel the bail. hence, these criminal miscellaneous petitions are dismissed.7. as contended by the learned government advocate(crl.side)regarding the application for cancellation of bail on account of non-compliance with the conditions is concerned, since such application is pending before the page4 of 6 concerned trial court, coimbatore, the trial court is directed to dispose of the same in.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 30-03-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN in CRL OP Nos.8679 & 8682 of 2025 Megala ..Petitioner in both Crl.MPs Vs 1.Rajesh 2.Haribhaskar 3.State Rep.By The Inspector Of Police, (Crime No.108 of 2025) 4.Deputy Superintendent of Police ..Respondent(s) in Crl.M.P.No.20488 of 2025 1.Rajesh 2.Sathyabama 3.Deputy Superintendent of Police Page1 of 6 4.State Rep.By The Inspector Of Police, (Crime No.108 of 2025) ..Respondent(s) in Crl.M.P.No.20438 of 2025 Prayer in Crl.MP.No.20488 of 2025: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 483(3) of BNSS, 2023, to cancel the bail granted to respondent No.1 and 2 in Crl.O.P.No.8679 of 2025 dated 27.03.2025. Prayer in Crl.MP.No.20438 of 2025: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 483(3) of BNSS, 2023, to cancel the bail granted to respondent No.1 and 2 in Crl.O.P.No.8682 of 2025 dated 27.03.2025. Crl.M.P.No.20488 of 2025 For Petitioner(s): Mr.Sunil Kumar R For Respondent(s): Mr.R.N.Kasi Viswanathan for R2 Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R3 & R4 Crl.M.P.No.20438 of 2025 For Petitioner(s): Mr.Sunil Kumar R For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Sarath Chandran for R1 & R2 Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R3 & R4 Page2 of 6

ORDER

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, at the time of registration of the complaint, the total amount alleged to have been cheated by the petitioner is Rs.3,40,00,000/-, out of which RS.3 crore was seized. However, subsequently, multiple complaints have been received and as on 23.01.2026, the total amount alleged to have been cheated has increased to Rs.29,55,20,190/- involving 375 victims. It is further submitted that this aspect was not at all considered by the Court while granting bail on 27.03.2025.

2. The said contention was strongly opposed by the learned counsel for

respondents 1 and 2, who would contend that the Court, while granting bail, had considered the complaint and the cheated amount alleged by the prosecution as on the date of the grant of bail. Based upon the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate, this Court recorded that Rs.3,40,00,000/- was the amount allegedly cheated, of which Rs.3 crore had been recovered. It is, therefore, contended that the question of suppression of facts does not arise, and the Court, while granting bail, had considered all relevant aspects. Hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the said order.

3. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for

respondents 3 and 4 would submit that he has already filed an application for cancellation of bail on the ground that the respondents 1 and 2 are not Page3 of 6 cooperating with the trial and is in violation of the conditions imposed by this Court in the bail order. However, the said application is still pending, due the pendency of another application before this Court for cancellation of bail.

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

5. Admittedly, no ground has been raised by the petitioner to show any violation of the bail conditions. However, it is the submission of the petitioner that certain facts were not considered by this Court while granting bail.

6. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the facts

that were germane at that point of time namely, that the amount allegedly cheated was Rs. 3,40,00,000/- and the amount recovered was Rs. 3 crore were duly considered by this Court. Therefore, the question of non-consideration of material facts does not arise in this case. Consequently, this Court does not find any ground to cancel the bail. Hence, these criminal miscellaneous petitions are dismissed.

7. As contended by the learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side)

regarding the application for cancellation of bail on account of non-compliance with the conditions is concerned, since such application is pending before the Page4 of 6 concerned trial Court, Coimbatore, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the same in accordance with its own merits and in accordance with law, without being influenced by any observations made by this Court. 30-03-2026 Index: Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation: Yes/No dpa To

1. The Special Judge, Special Court under TNPID Act, Coimbatore.

2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore. 3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police 4.The Inspector Of Police,

5. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras Page5 of 6

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

dpa in CRL OP Nos.8679 & 8682 of 2025 30-03-2026 Page6 of 6

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2026 Same Parties Megala vs Rajesh Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice C.Kumarappan