S. Annakodi v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22-10-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL OP NO.27422 of 2025 S.Annakodi Petitioner(s) Vs The State Represented by Inspector of Police, CBCID, Salem.
Crime No.03 of 2025.
Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in connection with Crime No.03 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.S.Anbazhagan For Respondent(s):
Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl.side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 465, 468, 471, 420 IPC & 66D Information Technology Act 2000, Section 3 r/w 5 Emblems and Name (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 in Crime No.03 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that one Ayyamperumal gave an information to RBI stating that some identified persons collecting amount from the public to give money to the officers of RBI for releasing certain funds received from the Central Government for sale of iridium copper and based on the information, the Assistant General Manager, RBI lodged a complaint. Hence, this case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has studied only up to the 12th standard and she has not played any role in fabricating any of the RBI records. He further submitted that some of the petitioner's relatives have been arrayed as accused and she was not involved in the alleged offence. He further submitted that the petitioner is engaged in a milk business and has been falsely implicated
in this case. He further submitted that the co-accused was released on bail by this Court in Crl.OP.No.21880 of 2025 dated 11.09.2025. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the petitioner is the main accused in this case and has been involved in various types of malpractices and fabrication of bogus documents. He further submitted the investigation has revealed that nearly 1000 persons have been cheated by the petitioner, and the total amount collected from them is to the tune of Rs.10 crores, and he opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and perused the materials available on record.
6. Though it appears that the fabrication of documents for the purpose of collecting money under the pretext of obtaining orders from RBI, on a careful perusal of the modus, it is revealed that several groups were involved in selling iridium and other materials by approaching various persons and inducing them to invest by stating that the materials
available with the accused possessed huge value in the national market, and on that pretext, they collected huge amounts from the public. The investigation was revealed that Rs.10 crores are involved in this case and nearly 1000 persons have been cheated.
7. Although it is stated that the co-accused was released on bail in Crl.OP.No.21880 of 2025 dated 11.09.2025. the order of this Court shows that the role of the petitioner therein, taking note of the overt act, was granted anticipatory bail. However, regarding this petitioner is concerned, the situation is different. Therefore, the above order has not been considered in her favour for the grant of anticipatory bail.
8. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and the gravity of the offences alleged against the petitioner, this Court is of the view that granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage would likely hamper the progress of the investigation.
9. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. 22-10-2025 drl
To 1.The Inspector of Police, CBCID, Salem.
2.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.
K.RAJASEKAR, J., drl CRL OP NO.27422 of 2025 22.10.2025