High Court · 2025

Crl.OP.No. 25021 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18.09.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKARCRL OP NO. 25021 of 2025andCrl.M.P.No. 17592 of 20251.R.Pavithra2.Rajendran @ Murugathasan ...Petitioners/A1 & A2VsThe State rep. by The Inspector of PolicePollachi East Police Station, Pollachi, Coimbatore District.(Crime No.233 of 2025) RespondentPRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS/438 of CrPC., to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest pending investigation 233 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.For Petitioner: Mr.S.AnanthFor Intervener: No AppearanceFor Respondent: Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Criminal Side)----O R D E RThe petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 420 of IPC and Sections 296(b), 351(2) of BNS in connection with Crime No. 233 of 2025 on the file 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 25021 of 2025 of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners and others had received 34 sovereigns of gold and Rs.4,00,000/- cash from the sister of the de-facto complainant to deliver the same to the de-facto complainant. After receiving the same, the petitioners/A1&A2 did not give to the de-facto complainant. Despite several requests the same, the petitioners and A3 abused filthy language and threatened the de-facto complainant with dire consequences. Hence the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners as well as the de-facto complainant are the family members. He further submits that the petitioners had paid the entire amount and sovereigns of gold to the de-facto complainant for the purpose of getting house hold articles. He further submits that the 1st petitioner informed the de-facto complainant that the jewels had already been handed over to her friend. He further submits that the 2nd petitioner has not received any jewels/cash from the de-facto complainant. He also submits that the petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 25021 of 2025 furnish sufficient solvent sureties for their release. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case and submits that totally three accused were involved in this case. A1 is the daughter of A2. A2 is the uncle of the de-facto complainant. A3 is the Pawn Broker. In the year 2022, the sister of the de-facto complainant had given 34 sovereigns of gold ornaments and cash Rs.4,00,000/- to the 1st petitioner/A1 to deliver the gold to the de-facto complainant. After receiving the gold jewels by the petitioners/A1&A2, they did not give any gold to the de-facto complainant and Rs.4,00,000/- has given to the friend of A1. The de-facto complainant continuously requested to return back the gold/cash, the petitioners/A1&A2 herein refused and thereby cheated the de-facto complainant and abused filthy language and threatened her with dire consequences. He further submits that the gold ornaments weighing 34 sovereigns of gold and Rs.4,00,000/- which were already received by the petitioners from the de-facto complainant and the same were not yet received. Therefore, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 25021 of 2025 5. Heard the learned counsels and perused the materials available on record.6.I have gone through the FIR as well as the relevant records, it reveals that A1 had received 34 sovereigns of gold ornaments and cash Rs.4,00,000/- from the sister of the de-facto complainant to deliver the same to the de-facto complainant. After receiving the same, the petitioners/A1&A2 did not give the same to the de-facto complainant and the same was pledged by them to the 3rd accused-Pawn Broker without the knowledge of the de-facto complainant. In this regard, the de-facto complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioners and A3-Pawn Broker. The petitioners and A3 had appeared before the Pollachi East Police Station, Coimbatore and they were enquired by the respondent police.7. On interrogation revealed that the 1st petitioner admitted and a letter of undertaking given before the Inspector of Police, Pollachi East Polist Station, Coimbatore, wherein, it has been stated that 5 sovereigns of 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 25021 of 2025 gold will be given on 20.01.2025 and remaining 29 sovereigns of gold will be given on 08.02.2025. It is seen that the de-facto complainant elaborately stated that the de-facto complainant was cheated by the petitioner/A1 herein and since the majority of the allegation is only against the petitioner/A1 herein. Hence, this Court is of the view that the petitioner/A2 is entitled to get anticipatory bail in this case. and this petition is dismissed insofar as the petitioner/A1 is concerned. 8. Accordingly, the 2nd petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Pollachi, on condition that the petitioner shall execute 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:(a) If the 2nd petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;[b] the sureties shall affix their photographs and 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 25021 of 2025 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;[c] the 2nd 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;[d] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the 2nd petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the 2nd petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.[f] Consequently, connected Crl.M.P.No. 17592 of 2025 is closed. 18.09.2025MSM6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 25021 of 2025 To1.The Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Pollachi.2.The Inspector of PolicePollachi East Police Station, Pollachi, Coimbatore District. (Crime No.233 of 2025)3.The Public Prosecutor,High Court of Madras.7/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No. 25021 of 2025 K.RAJASEKAR , J. MSM Crl.O.P.No. 25021 of 202518.09.20258/6