Praka Devi v. The State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL.O.P.No.20554 of 2025 Praka Devi ... Petitioner

Versus

State rep. by The Inspector of Police, DCB - II, Thiruvannamalai District.

(Crime No.9 of 2025) ... Respondent Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police in Crime No.9 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.B.Sundarapandiyan For Respondent :

Mr.S.Udaya Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471, 420 and 120-B of IPC, in Crime No.9 of 2025 seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner joining hands with other petitioner conspired together fabricated the settlement 1/5

deed in favour of one Prakash, who is the petitioner's brother and cheated the defacto complainant to a tune of Rs.21,45,000/-. Hence, the case. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is neither the signatory nor negotiated with the defacto complainant and her name was also not found place in the FIR. He also stated that the co-accused was also granted bail by this Court in Crl.OP.No.20758 of 2025 dated 26.09.2025. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner/A1 along with her family members had created a forged settlement deed by impersonating the deceased person and they sold the property to the defacto complainant. He further submitted that the petitioner had received a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from A1, who was arrested and released on bail. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) and perused the materials available on 2/5

record.

6. Considering the submissions made on both sides, the fact that the petitioner collected Rs.5 lakhs from A1 and though it is stated that she actively participated in the commission of offence, she is a lady, and the fact that the main accused/A1 was already released on bail, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thiruvannamalai, 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: (a) the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

3/5

(c) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (d) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

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

(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

22.10.2025 drl To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thiruvannamalai.

2. The Inspector of Police, DCB - II, Thiruvannamalai District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

drl 4/5

CRL.O.P.No.20554 of 2025 22.10.2025 5/5