Afzarunisha v. State Rep By Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04-11-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
1. AFZARUNISHA W/o.Syed Jahirullah, No.10/9, Vinayagar Kovil Street, Salem -636 004.
Petitioner(s) Vs
1. State rep by Inspector of Police, Bank fraud and Investigation wing (Alpha-3), Central crime Branch, Vepery, Chennai -7 Crime. No.163 of Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.163 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police For Petitioner(s):
T Ananthasekar For Respondent(s):
Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 of IPC r/w. 34 of IPC in Crime No. 163 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that she is one of the directors of Tokyo Info Solutions Private Limited, and her husband is (A2) and along with A3 obtained a loan by inflating the value of a car, thereby cheating the bank to the tune of Rs.46 lakhs. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner, being a director and the wife of A2, has been falsely implicated in the case. She is a lady and has not signed any loan papers. Therefore, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that A2 and A3 were arrested and released on bail. The petitioner is ranked as A4 and is also one of the directors, and the investigation in this is pending. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Considering the nature of the allegations, the fact that co-accused were
released on bail, and the allegation that the petitioner inflated the value of the vehicle and availed loan, and given that the vehicle is also recovered, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
6. Accordingly, the 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 Metropolitan Magistrate Court for exclusive trial of CCB cases, Egmore, Chennai, on condition that the 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 petitioners fails 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 one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;
(c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent
police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two 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 petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on 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 accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.
04-11-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order mpa To 1.Metropolitan Magistrate Court for exclusive trial of CCB cases, Egmore, Chennai.
1.State rep by Inspector of Police, Bank fraud and Investigation wing (Alpha-3), Central crime Branch, Vepery, Chennai -7 Crime. No.163 of 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
K.RAJASEKAR J.
mpa CRL OP No. 29958 of 04-11-2025