Gayathri, v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Dcb

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 29/04/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Gayathri ... Petitioner/Accused No.2 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Pudukottai.

Cr.No. 4 of 2026. ... Respondent/Respondent PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 4 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police.

For Petitioner : A. Joseph Jerry, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottaichamy, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER: The Court made the following order The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the 1/6

respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(2) and 318(4) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.4 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the folk singer and also the tenant of the petitioner and she has no relatives. By using the same, the petitioner and his husband created, drama as if somebody had hacked YouTube and Instagram account of the defacto a complainant's mobile phone, and they must follow wherever she went and also murder her, and to correct the same, by using the cybercrime officers, they need a huge amount. On believing the same, the defacto complainant gave a sum of Rs.80,00,000/- on various dates and 31⁄2 sovereigns of jewels. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and she was falsely implicated in this case and she is no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that this is the second an anticipatory bail petition and the earlier petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court on 17.03.2026 2/6

and now, the co-accused (A1) was arrested and released on bail. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner and other accused hacked the You-Tube, Instagram from the defacto complainant's mobile phone and thereafter, received a sum of Rs.80,00,000/- on various dates and 3 1⁄2 sovereigns of jewels from the defacto complainant by threatening her and the offence is grave in nature and the investigation is still pending and this is the second anticipatory bail petition and there are no change of circumstances. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He would further submit that the co-accused (A1) was already arrested and released on bail.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival/submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, and there is a money dispute 3/6

between the parties and already the co-accused was arrested and released on bail and even according to the prosecution, the alleged occurrence took place from the month of June 2024 and the FIR was registered only on 06.02.2026 belatedly and the co-accused was already arrested and released on bail, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory 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 learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Puthukottai, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

4/6

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

[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [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 leamed 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 B.N.S.

29.04.2026 dss 5/6

P. DHANABAL,J DSS To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Puthukottai. 2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Pudukottai.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.8487 of 2026 Date : 29/04/2026 6/6