Mrs. A.Sindhuja v. State Represented By The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 28.02.2025
CORAM:
THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN A. Sindhuja W/o. Anandhakumar .... Petitioner / Accused Vs State rep. by:- The Inspector Of Police, Perumbakkam Police Station.
... Respondent [Cr. No.28 of 2025] PRAYER: - The Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., praying to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner / Accused in Crime No.28 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr. Mohamed Saifulla For Respondent : Mr. S. Santhosh Government Advocate [Criminal side]
ORDER
The petitioner / Accused, who apprehends arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 420 and 1/5
406 of IPC in connection with the case in Crime No.28 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that A1 had borrowed a sum of Rs.20 lakhs from the defacto complainant promising to repay the said sum with interest @ 2% per month; that he had not repaid the same in spite of several repeated demands and requests; and that the petitioner's wife abetted the offence of cheating by her husband.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the allegations against the petitioner are false; that the petitioner is a wife of A1; that it is the case of non-repayment of loan by her husband and she has nothing to do with alleged transactions between A1 and the defacto complainant; and that in any case, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required and prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail to the 2/5
petitioner, reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions, submitted that it is the case of loan transactions between A1 and the defacto complainant.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record.
6. A reading of the FIR would show that the allegations only disclosed the non-repayment of loan by the first accused, who had borrowed a sum of Rs.20 lakhs from the defacto complainant. The alleged loan was given to the first accused on 01.04.2022. The case has been registered for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC, even as against the first accused. The petitioner is sought to be implicated on the ground that she had participated in the alleged transactions along with her husband. This Court is of the view that the complaint is clear abuse of process of law, against the petitioner. Hence the petitioner shall be released on anticipatory bail on own bond. 3/5
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Alandur on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned. 28.02.2025 mjs To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-II, Alandur.
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. 3.The Inspector Of Police, Perumbakkam Police Station. SUNDER MOHAN. J., mjs 4/5
28.02.2025 5/5