S.Priya v. State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR S.Priya ... Petitioner Vs.

The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Cuddalore District.

Crime No.58 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.58 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.T.Balachandran For Respondent :

Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/4

O R D E R

The petitioner herein apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 420 of IPC read with Section 19(c) of Transplantation of Human Organs Act in Crime No.58 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner joining hands with other accused and promised to arrange kidney transplantation for defacto complainant's ailing son and totally collected a sum of Rs.27.18 lakhs and subsequently when the defacto complainant had demanded to arrange for kidney transplantation, petitioner had demanded Rs. R4 lakhs more and thereafter, it revealed that the petitioner had cheated the defacto complainant and in the mean time, defacto complainant's son also died. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondent police issued notice under Section 41(A) notice and accordingly, petitioner had appeared and handed over Rs.5 lakhs to the defacto complainant and he is ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

2/4

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that out of the money cheated by the petitioner to the tune of Rs.27.18 lakhs, only Rs.4 lakhs has been repaid and the remaining amount yet to be recovered and the investigation is pending. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the nature of allegations and other circumstances and it is a clear case of cheating, the defacto complainant on the false promise of arranging kidney donor for the defacto complainant's son and subsequently, cheated him to the tune of Rs.27.18 lakhs and the same is not recovered fully, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 17.02.2026 sma To

1. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Cuddalore District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

sma 17.02.2026 4/4