Abarna Gayatri v. The State By Sub Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Abarna Gayatri W/o.Arunraj, 75-1/8 N,Railway Road, Omalur,Tk, Salem District.

..Petitioner(s) Vs The State by Sub Inspector of Police, CCB-Salem, Salem District.

..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, praying to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection with the in Crime No.12 of 2026, pending investigation on the file of the Respondent Police and thus render justice.

For Petitioner(s):

M/s.M.Hariharan For Respondent(s):

Mr.N.Palanivel, Govt Advocate (Crl Side) for Respondent ******

ORDER

The petitioner who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 318(3), 318(4) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.12 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. This is a case of On-Line trading. According to the prosecution, the de facto complainant initially pledged her jewels and obtained a sum of Rs. 8,50,000/-, which she invested in the first accused company on 11.11.2024. Subsequently, the jewels were pledged on two more occasions in the name of the petitioner without her knowledge, and the amounts were obtained through false representations. Hence, a case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and she has not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and she has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner being a woman, assisted the defacto complainant to pledge her jewels. He would further submit that the de facto complainant, knowing all the consequences of the investment in the Online trading, cannot blame the petitioner. He would submit that she is ready to abide by any

conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that the petitioner and the other accused have cheated the de facto complainant to the tune of Rs.24,00,000/-. He would further submit that the first accused is still absconding. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides and upon the fact that the initial investment took place on 11.11.2024 and that there is no overtact attributed to this petitioner, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Salem, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a

sum of Rs.20,000/- (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 petitioner 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent Police as and when required for interrogation; (d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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 petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

7.This Criminal Original Petition is ordered accordingly. 15-06-2026 KMI To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Salem.

2.The State by Sub Inspector of Police, CCB-Salem, Salem District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

KMI 15-06-2026