A.Sikkandar vs The State Rep By
2026 Latest Caselaw 2087 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2087 Mad
Judgement Date : 21 April, 2026

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

A.Sikkandar vs The State Rep By on 21 April, 2026

                                                              CRL OP Nos. 9684 of 2026, etc., and Batch


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                              DATED: 21-04-2026

                                                    CORAM

                                   THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

                   CRL OP Nos. 9684, 9690, 9699, 9702, 9709, 9717, 9719, 9723, 9726, 9731,
                                     9732, 9735, 9736 & 9740 of 2026

                 A.Sikkandar
                                                                        ..Petitioner(s)
                                                                        in all Crl OPs
                                                         Vs
                 The State rep by
                 The Inspector of Police,
                 CBCID Police Station,
                 Coimbatore District.
                                                                        ..Respondent(s)
                                                                        in     Crl.OP.Nos.9684,
                                                                        9690, 9702, 9709, 9726,
                                                                        9731, 9732, 9735 &
                                                                        9736 of 2026
                 The State rep by
                 The Inspector of Police,
                 CBCID (OCU) Police Station,
                 Coimbatore District.
                                                                        ..Respondent(s)
                                                                        in     Crl.OP.Nos.9699,
                                                                        9717, 9719, 9723 &
                                                                        9740 of 2026

                PRAYER in CRL OP Nos. 9684, 9690, 9702, 9709, 9726, 9731, 9732, 9735 &
                9736 of 2026: Criminal Original Petitions have been filed under Section 483 of
                the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to enlarge the petitioner
                on bail pending investigation in Crime Nos.10, 8, 9, 5, 12, 11, 6, 4 and 3 of
                2026 on the file of respondent police.



                                                                                          __________
                                                                                           Page1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                  CRL OP Nos. 9684 of 2026, etc., and Batch


                PRAYER in CRL OP Nos. 9699, 9717, 9719, 9723 & 9740 of 2026: Criminal
                Original Petitions have been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
                Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending
                investigation in Crime No.7, 1, 3, 4 and 2 of 2026 on the file of respondent
                Police.


                                  For Petitioner(s):      Mr.S.Bharanidharan
                                                          In all Crl OPs

                                  For Respondent(s):      Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar
                                                          Government Advocate
                                                          (Criminal Side)
                                                          In all Crl OPs


                                                       COMMON ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody

on 06.04.2026 for alleged offences under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(1), and

351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, in Crime Nos. 10, 8, 9, 5,

12, 11, 6, 4, and 3 of 2026, and Crime Nos. 7, 1, 3, 4, and 2 of 2026

respectively, on the file of the respective respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that these matters relate to business

transactions between the defacto complainant and the accused. The defacto

complainant had advertised grocery products on the IndiaMART website. It is

alleged that a company named ABS Traders placed purchase orders for various

grocery products from the defacto complainant; however, after delivery, only a

__________ Page2 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP Nos. 9684 of 2026, etc., and Batch

partial payment was made. When the defacto complainant requested the

remaining balance, the accused allegedly threatened them with dire

consequences. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is

innocent and has been falsely implicated. He further submits that the petitioner

was never involved in the business affairs of ABS Traders and has been in

judicial custody since 06.04.2026. The learned counsel also brought to the

notice of this Court that the co-accused was granted bail by this Court on

04.03.2026. It is his specific submission that the petitioner is ready to abide by

any stringent conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for the grant of

bail.

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

respondent police, while opposing the grant of bail, reiterated the prosecution's

case. Upon instructions, he submitted that while the petitioner has no prior bad

antecedents, the total value defrauded from merchants is Rs. 1,89,96,010/-. He

further contended that the petitioner, arrayed as A3, contacted wholesalers who

advertised goods online for bulk sale. The accused allegedly purchased these

items and subsequently resold them to known retail merchants and local

markets. However, he confirmed that the co-accused was granted bail by this

Court on 04.03.2026.

__________ Page3 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP Nos. 9684 of 2026, etc., and Batch

5. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the

learned counsel on either side.

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

incarceration undergone by the petitioner, the nature of the allegations arising

out of business transactions, the fact that the petitioner has no prior bad

antecedents, and also the fact that the co-accused has already been enlarged on

bail, this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to certain

stringent conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on

executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand

only) each, with two sureties each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the

learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Coimbatore, and subject to the

following conditions:

[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 twice a day at 10.30 a.m. and 05.30 p.m. for a period of one month and thereafter appear before the respondent police

__________ Page4 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP Nos. 9684 of 2026, etc., and Batch

everyday at 10.30.am 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 Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];