Monisha v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.28057 of 2025 Monisha ... Petitioner Vs.

The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, K8 Arumbakkam Police Station, Chennai.

Crime No.319 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, BNSS, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.319 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.Santhosh Kumar Ravi For Intervenor : Mr.P.Palaninathan For Respondent :

Mr.A.Gopinath, Government Advocate (Criminal Side).

1/4

O R D E R

The petitioner was arrested and remanded to Judicial custody from 18.08.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(2), 61(2) of BNS, in Crime No.319 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused connived with each other and cheated the defacto complainant and others on the guise of arranging job at abroad. The defacto complainant has paid Rs.48,00,000/- to the accused. However, the accused failed to arrange the job and cheated the defacto complainant. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and she has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation and abide by any conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/4

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that there are 28 victims cheated by the accused and no money was recovered so far. Hence, he opposed to grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. The learned counsel for the Intervenor would submit that the petitioner herein has canvassed the defacto complainant to bring his friends also. Believing her sweet words, the defacto complainant has brought his friends also and they were cheated to the tune of Rs.48,50,000/-. Hence, he opposed to grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the materials available on record.

7. Considering the gravity of the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner and also the fact that huge amount involved in this case, it was not yet recovered, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

3/4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

kmm

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. 14.10.2025 kmm To

1. The Inspector of Police, K8 Arumbakkam Police Station, Chennai.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

Crl.O.P.No.28057 of 2025 4/4