Chandraleka v. State Rep By Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 13-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Chandrakala W/o.Purushothaman, No.12, Mariyamman Kovil Street, Dalavappattu, Periyathatchur, Gingee, Villupuram-605651.

2. Purushothaman S/o.Kumarasamy, No.12, Mariyamman Kovil Street, Dalavappattu, Periyathatchur, Gingee, Villupuram-605651.

..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep by Inspector of Police, Villupuram Taluk Police Station, Villupuram District.

(Crime No.100 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of the arrest pending investigation in Crime No.100 of 2026 on the file of respondent police and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Saravanabhavan G For Respondent(s):

Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Section 318(4), 296(b), 351(2) of BNS (Section 420, 294(b) 406(2) IPC) in Crime No.100 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 02.03.2026, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioners stating that the petitioners promised to secure the Government post for the defacto complainant and they asked Rs.1,200,000/- for securing the post. The defacto complainant also deposited the amount into the petitioners' account. But the petitioners not arranged any work and the defacto complainant approached the petitioners to refund the amount but they are not repaid. Hence the case.

3. The occurrence took place on 02.10.2024, however, the FIR was registered on 28.02.2026. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that they had already returned R.1,50,000/-. Even according to the petitioners, total amount is only Rs.6,00,000/-. He further submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would strongly opposed the bail application on the ground that this a case involving the job racket.

5. Looking into the factual position, the incident took place on 02.10.2024, the complaint came to be registered on 28.02.2026. In such view of the position, at this length of time no custodial interrogation of the petitioners are required, this Court is inclined to enlarge on them bail, subject to certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Villupuram, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- each (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: (a) If the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically 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 identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The petitioners shall report before the respondent police morning at 10.30 a.m., and evening 05.30 p.m., for a period of one month and thereafter morning at 10.30 am for another 15 days and as and when required;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

13-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order MTL

To

1. State Rep by Inspector of Police, Villupuram Taluk Police Station, Villupuram District.

2. The Judicial Magistrate -I, Villupuram .

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

MTL 13-03-2026