High Court · 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 23.01.2025PRESENTThe Hon`ble Mr.Justice N.ANAND VENKATESHCRL OP(MD). No.64 of 2025Muthulakshmi... Petitioner / Accused No.2 Vs 1. The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Madurai District. (Crime No.17 of 2024)... Respondent/Complainant2. Jeyagurunathan ... Petitioner/Intervener/Defacto Complainant in Crl.M.P(MD).No.878/2025 For Petitioner : Mr.M.Subash Babu, Senior Counsel, for M/s.Subash Law Office For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)For Intervenor : Mr.MA.Karunanithi, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS Act.1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 17 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police.ORDER : The Court made the following order :-The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police forthe alleged offences under Sections 406, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC, in Crime No.17of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons totally collected nearly40 lakhs with the promise that they will get Government job to four victims who hadparted with the money. A sum of Rs.8 lakhs was paid by way of bank transfer to theaccount of A1 and the balance amount was paid by way of cash. There are totally twoaccused persons in this case and the petitioner has been arrayed as A2 and she is thewife of A1. A1 has been arrested in this case.3. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the material records ofthe case.2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

4. The main ground that was urged by the learned senior counsel appearing onbehalf of the petitioner is that the petitioner only happens to be the wife of A1 and theallegation is that she was also present at the time of handing over the money to A1.The learned senior counsel further submitted that the defacto complainant along withothers trespassed into the house and detained the petitioner and her minor daughterin a separate room and kidnapped A1. Thereafter, they took away more than 10 lakhsby way of cash and 5 sovereigns of gold and also a SWIFT car. With respect to thisincident, an FIR also came to be registered in Crime No.1185 of 2024 by ThiruppallaiPolice Station, Madurai and the investigation is pending.5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that in theinstant case 4 persons have been cheated and a total sum of Rs.40 lakhs was takenaway from them. The learned Government Advocate submitted that apart fromreceiving the money, forged appointment orders were also created and the victimswere made to believe that they have secured Government jobs. The learnedGovernment Advocate further submitted that A1 has voluntarily confessed that hehas received the money and that he will repay back the money to the victim. In viewof the same, the learned Government Advocate vehemently opposed the grant ofanticipatory bail to the petitioner.3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

6. The learned counsel for the defacto complainant submitted that the victimswere cheated by the husband and wife and both of them have connived and takenaway a sum of Rs.40 lakhs. The learned counsel further submitted that the custodialinterrogation of the petitioner is very much essential since the money has to berecovered in this case. Accordingly, he also vehemently opposed the grant ofanticipatory bail to the petitioner.7. In the considered view of this Court, it is seen that a sum of Rs.8 lakhs wasinitially paid by way of bank transaction by sending the amount to the account of A1.Rest of the amount is said to have been paid by way of cash. The specific allegationagainst the petitioner is that she was also present along with A1 when the money wasgiven and the petitioner was fully aware about the fact that forged appointmentorders were issued to the victims.8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case andconsidering the fact that this petitioner happens to be the wife of A1 and the specificcase is that the entire amount was paid to A1 and the petitioner was aware of thesame and taking note of the subsequent incident that had taken place in this case4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis which resulted in the registration of an FIR in Crime No.1185 of 2024 and consideringthe fact that no custodial interrogation may be required insofar as the petitioner isconcerned, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner withcertain conditions.9. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event ofarrest or on her appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on whichthe order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai, oncondition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (RupeesTen Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of therespondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction ofthe learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bailshall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left ThumbImpression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadharcard or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity. [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on every Mondayand Friday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either duringinvestigation or trial. [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/TrialCourt is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance withlaw as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by thelearned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Courtin P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered underSection 269 of BNS, 2023. Sd/- 23/01/2025 / TRUE COPY / /02/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai -625 023pal 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis TO1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, MADURAI.2 DO-THROUGH- THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI DISTRICT.3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, MADURAI.4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1 CC to M/s.M/S.SUBASH LAW OFFICE, Advocate ( SR-827[I] dated 24/01/2025 ) ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.64 of 2025 Date :23/01/2025ES/SKN/SAR /07.02.2025/ 7P/6CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from17/07/2023.7/7