R. Hemamaalini v. The State By, Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.28143 of 2025 R.Hemamalini ... Petitioner Vs.
The State by Inspector of Police, Grand Bazzar Police Station, Puducherry-605 001.
... Respondent (Cr.No.149 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of the arrest in Cr.No.149 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Senthamizhan For Intervenor : Mr.A.Anandharaj For Respondent : Mr.M.V.Ramachandra Murthy Public Prosecutor (Puducherry)
O R D E R
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 420 r/w 34 of IPC, in Crime No.149 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
1/5
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, joining hands with the other accused, was involved in collecting nearly Rs.1 Crore from 39 victims on the promise of arranging jobs in Canada. However, they failed to honour the promise, which led to the registration of the FIR. Hence, the present case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had worked only as a Receptionist and that she had resigned from the job one year prior to the registration of the FIR. It is further submitted that she was harassed by A1 and has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submitted that she is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that an amount of Rs.12.25 lakhs was collected from the defacto complainant alone, and he was sent to Canada, where he found that no job had been arranged and he was left without any support. Thereafter, he returned and lodged a complaint. The learned Government Advocate further submitted that 38 2/5
other persons have also come forward with similar complaints, and the total amount involved is Rs.1 Crore. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions and on perusal of the materials available on record, it is revealed that the petitioner had worked as a General Manager, and the statements of the witnesses indicate that she was actively involved in the business activities of the company even in November 2024. Hence, it cannot be accepted that she had resigned from the job earlier. Further, the amount involved has accumulated to Rs.1 Crore, and if anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it will hamper the investigation. Therefore, I am not inclined to consider the petitioner's bail petition, and the interim anticipatory bail already granted to the petitioner is hereby cancelled.
6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 18.11.2025 Vv To 3/5
1. The Judicial Magistrate-II, Puducheery.
2. The Inspector of Police, Grand Bazzar Police Station, Puducherry-605 001.
.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
K.RAJASEKAR , J.
4/5
Vv Crl.O.P.No.28143 of 2025 18.11.2025 5/5