S. Nanthini v. The State Rep.By The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23-01-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA S. Nanthini Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep.By The Inspector Of Police, Peelamedu P.S., Coimbatore City Coimbatore District Crime No.811/2024 Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s): Mr.Bharanidharan.S For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Santhosh, Government Advocate, (Crl.side).
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 61(2), 316(2), 318(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (B.N.S.), in Crime No.811/2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
Page No.1 of 6
2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused/A1, projecting himself as a TNEB contractor holding several contracts had induced the de-facto complainant and other victims to invest a sum of about Rs.90 Lakhs in his business, and thereafter cheated them, including the de-facto complainant. Hence, this case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is a case of financial dispute between her husband and other persons, and she has been falsely projected as an accused in this case. He further submits that the petitioner, being the wife of the accused/A1, has no role in this case. Additionally, he submits that her husband and the other co-accused were arrested and are still in jail. There are no previous cases pending against the petitioner. Therefore, he prays that anticipatory bail be granted to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He stated that the petitioner is A3. The accused/A1 & A2 impersonated themselves as TNEB contractors and made the gullible Page No.2 of 6
persons to invest with them, and thereby cheating them, includng the defacto complainant. The petitioner is the wife of the accused/A1. The coaccused/A1 & A2 were arrested and are still in judicial custody. He further submits that the petitioner has no previous cases pending against her.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.
6. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, and considering the fact that the petitioner is arrayed as an accused only because she is the wife of the accused/A1, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions and accordingly, the 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 of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Coimbatore, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties Page No.3 of 6
each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent Police or the Police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the said Magistrate, on further condition that:
[a] if the petitioner fails to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled;
[b] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;
[c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police on everyday at 10:30 A.M., until further orders; [d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during the investigation or during the trial; [e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during the investigation or during the trial;
[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner was released Page No.4 of 6
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)AIR SCW 5560] [g] If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.
23-01-2025 klt To
1. The Inspector Of Police, Peelamedu P.S., Coimbatore City Coimbatore District Crime No.811/2024 A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
Page No.5 of 6
klt CRL OP NO.1498 of 2025 23.01.2025 Page No.6 of 6