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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 29.06.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Sakunthala ... Petitioner Vs.

The State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Thittakudi Police Station, Cuddalore District.

(Crime No.104 of 2026) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioner anticipatory bail in the event of her arrest in Crime No.104 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Thirumoorthy For Respondent : Mrs.R.S.Indira, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b) and 351(2) of BNS r/w Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, in Crime No.104 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

1/6

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, on the pretext of arranging a loan of Rs.10,00,000/- to the de facto complainant, obtained her property documents and other records, collected a sum of about Rs.14,00,000/- towards exorbitant amounts towards interest, and thereafter continued to demand further sums by threatening to take over the de facto complainant's property. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed the anticipatory bail application and submitted that the de facto complainant had paid a sum of Rs.14,00,000/- to the petitioner. She further submitted that one previous case is pending against the petitioner.

2/6

5. Taking into consideration of the totality of the circumstances, including the fact that the dispute between the petitioner and the de facto complainant arises out of a monetary transaction, that the occurrence relates to January 2026, and that the FIR came to be registered only on 02.06.2026, this Court is of the firm view that, at this length of time, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail, 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, Tittagudi, 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;

3/6

(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 daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks, and thereafter 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.

29.06.2026 cda 4/6

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Tittagudi.

2.The Inspector of Police, Thittakudi Police Station, Cuddalore District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

cda 29.06.2026 6/6