← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/7199/2026granted

Yogalakshmi v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Sub Inspector Of Police,

2026-04-10Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 10/04/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Yogalakshmi ... Petitioner/Accused No.1 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Sub Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Madurai District.

Crime No.38 of 2025. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.38 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.

For Petitioner : J. Balameenakshi, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottaichamy, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to 1/6

judicial custody on 02.03.2026 for the offences punishable under Section 420 of IPC, in Crime No.38 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that there is a money dispute between the petitioner and the defacto complainant and the petitioner is none other than the neighbour of the complainant. On that strength, the petitioner borrowed a sum of Rs.50 lakhs from the complainant on various dates for completion of her construction of house. Thereafter, she failed to repay the same. Hence, the respondent police registered a case against the accused for the aforesaid offences and arrested the petitioner. Hence, this petition.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and she was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that already the co-accused was released on anticipatory bail and no previous case is pending against the petitioner and she has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 2/6

02.03.2026. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that in order to complete her construction work, the petitioner borrowed a sum of Rs.50 lakhs from the complainant. Thereafter, she failed to repay the same and hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner. However, he fairly conceded that already the co-accused was released on anticipatory bail and no previous case is pending against the petitioner.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and there is a money dispute between the parties and already the co-accused was released on anticipatory bail and no previous case is pending against the petitioner, and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: 3/6

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute 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 Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected;

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

[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

4/6

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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 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].

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(P D B J) 10.04.2026 dss 5/6

P. DHANABAL,J DSS To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai 2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Madurai District.

3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Madurai. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.7199 of 2026 Date : 10/04/2026 6/6