Anitha v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Aruppukottai Town
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 15.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL 1.Anitha 2.Selvaraj 3.Veeraperumal
...Petitioners/A1 to A3
Vs 1.State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Aruppukkottai Town Police Station, Virudhunagar District.
(Crime No.205 of 2026) ..Respondents For Petitioners:Mr.Arul Jenifer for Mr.S.Thangabalamurugan For Respondent :Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side) For Intervener :Mr.V.Vijayendiran PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.205 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.
1/8
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A1 to A3, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 294(b) and 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act, in Crime No.205 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. (offence amended vide court order daed 10.06.2026 in Crl.M.P.(MD).No.10218 of 2026)
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners cheated the defacto complainant for providing Government Job by receiving a sum of Rs.3 lakhs. Thereafter, they neither secured job nor repaid the amount. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they were falsely implicated in this 2/8
case and they are no way connected in the above said incident. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned counsel for the intervener represented the defacto complainant and would submit that the defacto complainant is going to file intervene petition.
5.This Court has already adjourned the matter more than twice at the request of the intervener. However, no petition has been filed by him so far. Hence, his request was rejected.
6. The learned Counsel for State of TN (Crl.
Side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the investigation is still pending and the offences are grave in nature. He would further submit that the petitioners have no previous cases. However, he opposes to grant 3/8
anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
7. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
8. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioners and even according to the case of prosecution, the occurrence took place in the year 2024 and the FIR has been registered belatedly on 03.06.2026, by this time, the material part of the investigation might have been completed and no previous case is pending against the petitioners and even according to the case of prosecution the offences are borne out of records and there is no scope for tampering the evidence and and hence, the interim anticipatory already granted by this Court is made absolute subject to the following conditions:
[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are 4/8
ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District, on condition that the petitioners shall 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 concerned and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.
[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature.
[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
5/8
[e] the petitioners 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 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 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.
(P D B J) 15.06.2026 vsg 6/8
To 1.The learned Judicial Magistrate, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Aruppukkottai Town Police Station, Virudhunagar District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
7/8
P. DHANABAL, J., vsg
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 9538 of 2026 Date : 15.06.2026 8/8