Subbulakshmi v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Central Crime Branch

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 18.03.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN CRL OP(MD)No.4786 of 2026 and Crl.MP.(MD).No.6191 of 2026 Subbulakshmi ... Petitioner / Accused No.9

Versus

The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch Police Station, Madurai City.

(Crime No.52 of 2025) ... Respondent / Complainant PRAYER :-Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.52 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.G.Thiruvarutselvan Advocate For Respondent :

Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For Intervener :

Mr.K.R.Laxman 1/8

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.02.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 420 of IPC in Crime No.52 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with the other accused, induced the defacto complainant by making a false promise that investments in online trading would double within two years. Believing such misrepresentation, the defacto complainant and his wife invested a total sum of ?60,20,000/- in the names of the companies allegedly run by the accused, namely "Conti Trainers" and "Conti Capitals." Subsequently, the accused failed to repay the said amount. Upon further enquiry, the defacto complainant came to understand that the accused had similarly cheated several other persons. Consequently, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent police, who registered a case in Crime No. 52 of 2025 for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

2/8

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the mother of Accused No.2. According to the prosecution, Accused No.2 had cheated certain amounts which were deposited in the name of the petitioner (Accused No.9), either in the form of jewellery or land. It is further submitted that all the jewellery has been recovered and the documents pertaining to the petitioner have also been recovered. The petitioner has been in custody since 04.02.2026, she is aged about 56 years. Hence, he seeks the grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the intervener would submit that the petitioner and the other accused had swindled money by cheating the de-facto complainant; hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner is the beneficiary of the entire cheated amount and therefore, the petitioner must deposit a reasonable amount. He strongly opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner. 3/8

6. This Court heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed on record.

7. Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, the Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch Police Station, Madurai, was present before this Court along with the case diary file and submitted that the jewels have been recovered and the documents have also been recovered. The officer further stated that there is not only one defacto complainant, but the accused persons have cheated other victims as well, the investigation is still pending. The respondent police are now ready to file the preliminary final report.

8. Considering the statement of the investigating officer that the petitioner is the mother of A2 and A2 invested the crime amount in the name of the petitioner and huge quantity of jewels are recovered and also the material documents also seized from the custody of the petitioner and she is confined in prison from 04.02.2026 onwards and he is aged about 56 years, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions:

4/8

9. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Madurai, and on further conditions that :- [a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; 5/8

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner is released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]; and [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

18.03.2026 gvn 6/8

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Madurai.

2. The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch Police Station, Madurai City.

3. The Superintendent, Central Women Prison, Madurai.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

7/8

K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN ,J.

gvn

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.4786 of 2026 Date : 18.03.2026 8/8