Sathiyarani v. The State Rep By Its The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.09.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.21358 of 2025
1. Sathiyarani
2. Priyadharshini ...
Petitioners Vs.
The State Rep by its The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Perambalur District.
... Respondent (Cr.No.24 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.24 of 2025 pending on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.Raji For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Section 417, 420, 294(b) and 506(i) of IPC in Cr.No.24 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners along with other 1/6
accused allegedly promised to double the defacto complainant's money if he invest Rs.1,00,000/- with weekly returns of Rs.4,500/- per lakh. Believing them, he paid a total of Rs.33,33,850/- through cash and G-pay, but the amount was not returned. The defacto-complainant lodged a complaint, and an FIR was registered by the District Crime Branch, Perambalur.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prayed that anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and reported that the first petitioner herein was arrested and already released on bail by this Court vide order dated 25.09.2025 in Crl.OP.No.26490 of 2025 and one of the accused persons was arrested and already released on bail by this Court vide order dated 19.08.2025 in Crl.OP.No.22468 of 2025. However, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by both counsel, the co accused were enlarged on bail by 2/6
this Court and and taking note of the fact that the first petitioner herein was arrested and already released on bail and hence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the first petitioner and in respect of second petitioner is concerned, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the second petitioner, subject to certain conditions:
7. Accordingly, the second 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 made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Perambalur on condition that the second 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 condition: (a) If the second petitioner failed to surrender before the concerned 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 3/6
one of identify proofs to ensure their identity; (c) The second 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;
(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the second petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the second 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 second petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.
8. Further, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed as against the first petitioner, since she was already released on bail. 26.09.2025 Vv To
1. The Judicial Magistrate -I, Perambalur.
2. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Perambalur District.
4/6
3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.
K.RAJASEKAR , J.
Vv 5/6
Crl.O.P.No.21358 of 2025 26.09.2025 6/6