Chennammal v. State By , Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP NO.162 of 2026

1. Chennammal

2. Sathiyaraj

3. Rani

4. Kalyani

5. Nagan ... Petitioners / A1 to A5 Vs The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, Karimangalam Police Station, Dharmapuri District.

(Crime No.524 of 2025) ... Respondent/ Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. [Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023], pleased to enlarge the petitioners herein on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent in Crime No.524 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.Thirumoorthy D For Respondent : M/s. J.R. Archana Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ******

O R D E R

The petitioners herein, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b) and 108 of BNSS Act, 1/5

2023 [294(b) and 306 of IPC] in Crime No.524 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that, the petitioners herein are ranked as A1 to A4, A6 in this case and they are the members of the Women Self Help Group at Dharmapuri. They along with the deceased availed loan of Rs.12,00,000/- from the Canara Bank and repaid the same to the deceased to settle the loan. The deceased had deposited only Rs.6,00,000/- and misappropriated the balance amount of Rs.6,55,000/- without repaying it in the Bank. Hence, the petitioners quarreled with the deceased and demanded back the money. Unable to bear the same, she committed suicide by consuming poison. Hence, this case. 3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are falsely implicated in this case. The petitioners had repaid the entire amount to the deceased whereas, she misappropriated the amount and when it was questioned, admitting her mistake, she consumed poison and therefore, the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged and that the petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and to cooperate for the investigation, hence sought for anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 2/5

4.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police while opposing the anticipatory bail to the petitioners reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the investigation of this case is pending and there is no previous case as against the petitioners. 5.

Considering the submissions made, facts and circumstances of this case, nature of allegation, the fact that there is money dispute between the petitioners and the deceased and custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. 6.

Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned District Munsif-cumJudicial Magistrate, Karimangalam on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen 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 petitioners fail to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, this Order shall stand automatically 3/5

cancelled;

[b] 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;

[c] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30.a.m., for a period of three 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 petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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 abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

08.01.2026 ssa 4/5

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

ssa To

1. The District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Karimangalam.

2. The Inspector of Police, Karimangalam Police Station, Dharmapuri District.

(Crime No.524 of 2025)

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

CRL OP NO.162 of 2026 08.01.2026 5/5