Amutha v. The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL OP No. 21076 of 2025 Amutha W/o. Vijayakumar, D No.18, Vivekananda Street, Perambalur-621 212.

Petitioner(s) Vs The Inspector of Police, Dist., Crime Branch II, Anti-Land Grabbing Spl Cell, Perambalur-621212.

(Crime No. Not known of 2025) Respondent(s) PRAYER :To enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest by the Respondent Police in Crime No. not known of 2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch II, Police Station, Perambalur District or on his appearance before the Court and thus render justice.

For Petitioner : Mr.Dharanidharan Ramachandran For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The Petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 318(4) of BNS 2023, in Crime No.not known of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are acquainted with each other. The defacto complainant approached the petitioner to obtain a patta; the defacto complainant handed over a copy of the sale agreement to the petitioner, who used it to obtain the patta in the defacto complainant's name. Subsequently, the petitioner, forging the defacto complainant's signature, mortgaged the property in favour of Canara Bank and obtained a loan of Rs.10 lakhs, thereby cheated the defacto complainant. Hence, the case.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner falsely implicated in this case and she was not involved in obtaining the loan by using the defacto complainant's document and the money was also directly paid into the defacto complainant's account and she was not aware about the further transactions taken place in the defacto

complainant's account and he submitted that she is ready to co-operate for the investigation.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner to obtain a patta; the defacto complainant handed over a copy of the sale agreement to the petitioner, who used it to obtain the patta in the defacto complainant's name. Subsequently, the petitioner, forging the defacto complainant's signature, mortgaged the property in favour of Canara Bank and obtained a loan of Rs.10 lakhs, thereby cheating the defacto complainant.

5. After considering the submissions made by both sides, this Court directed the petitioner to appear before the respondent police for some period. After granting interim protection in Crl.O.P.No.21076 of 2025, dated 17.10.2025, the petitioner herein was also appeared before the respondent police and in the meantime, the respondent police has also obtained the bank documents which revealed that the loans were obtained for a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- and all the funds were disbursed in the name of the five private persons and those private persons were also summoned and examined and it was revealed that the money was paid to the petitioner

herein on the request of the petitioner.

6.Considering the above submissions made by both sides, since the petitioner has received the money and it is a clear case of cheating the de-facto complainant, hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed and also interim protection already granted by this Court shall stands canclled. 12.12.2025 MSM To

1. The Inspector Of Police, Dist., Crime Branch II, Anti-Land Grabbing Spl Cell, Perambalur-621212. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

MSM CRL OP No. 21076 of 2025 12.12.2025