Kalaivani v. State Rep. By,The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 23.06.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN S.Kalaivani ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep. by The Inspector of Police D-1 Ramanathapuram Police Station Coimbatore City Crime No.99 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of her arrest by the respondent police in Crime No.99 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Senthilvel For Respondent :

Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/4

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 465, 468 and 420of IPC, in Crime No.99 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that there are totally two accused in this case, in which the petitioner was arrayed as A2. It is alleged that both the accused had cheated several persons by inducing them to deposit huge money for selling the property, but the accused never owned any property. So far, 8 cases were registered against the petitioner and her husband. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is no way connected with the alleged offence and she was not aware about the business transaction. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner was not a named accused in the FIR and being the proprietor of the construction company, the respondent police wantonly harassing the petitioner. However, on instructions, the learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the 2/4

respondent police submitted that there are totally two accused in this case in which0 the petitioner is arrayed as A2 and the petitioner is involved in 7 previous cases which are of similar nature. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. The petitioner is involved in 7 previous cases which are of similar nature. That part, the petitioner's husband was already arrested and remanded to judicial custody. Therefore, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required in this case.

6. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 23.06.2025 uma 3/4

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

uma To 1.The Inspector of Police D-1 Ramanathapuram Police Station Coimbatore City

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

23.06.2025 4/4