Deepa v. State By Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.07.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

1. Deepa

2. Ramkumar

3. DivyaBharathi ... Petitioners Vs.

State by Inspector of Police, Inspector of Police, (Crime), T-6, Avadi Police Station, Chennai.

(Crime No.143 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.143 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Senthil Kumar For Respondent :

Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 420 of IPC in Crime No.143 of 2025, on the file of the respondent, seeks bail. 1/5

2. The case of the prosecution is that one Mrs.Devi, the defacto complainant, has lodged a complaint alleging that the Petitioners being her neighbours, approached her for financial assistance citing personal family difficulties. When the complainant expressed her inability to lend money due to lack of funds, the petitioners represented that they had exhausted their own borrowing limits with financial institutions and assured the complainant that if she could secure loans in her name, they would repay the EMIs. Relying upon these representations, the complainant and 13 others allegedly raised loans to the tune of Rs.17,07,602/-, which were then given to the petitioners. The petitioners initially paid the EMIs for six months and subsequently defaulted, vacating their residence thereafter.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are an innocent person and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He also submitted that the petitioners are no way connected with the alleged offence, however, they have been suffering incarceration from 19.06.2025. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the transaction is purely civil in nature and arises out of a private loan arrangement. It 2/5

is submitted that only the first petitioner had direct dealings with the defacto complainant and the second and third petitioners were unnecessarily implicated, having only attempted to mediate the dispute amicably. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing for grant of bail to the petitioners, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioners were arrested on 19.06.2025. He further submitted that the matter is under investigation and the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required.

5. This Court has carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the available records. The allegations indicate that significant sums were raised by the defacto complainant and others based on the assurances of the petitioners. The repayment default and subsequent disappearance of the accused raises serious concerns.

3/5

6. At this stage, considering the nature of allegations, the amount involved and the stage of investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 21.07.2025 nsl To

1. Inspector of Police, (Crime), T-6, Avadi Police Station, Chennai.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

4/5

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

nsl 21.07.2025 5/5