Pandeeswari v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Elumalai

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 27/06/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI Pandeeswari, W/o.Saravanan ... Petitioner/A2 Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Elumalai Police Station, Madurai District.

(Crime No.263 of 2023) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Palmurugan.K, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.S.Prakash, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/4

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.263 of 2023 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/A2, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 403, 408 & 417 of IPC in Crime No.263 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant is running a business under the name and style of "JB Cable Network". In the course of business, the 1st accused approached the de-facto complainant and requested a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-, which was handed over to the accused. Subsequently, on another occasion, the de-facto complainant lent a sum of Rs.36,50,000/- to the accused persons by executing a loan affirmation deed. After a lapse of one and a half years, when the de-facto complainant approached the accused for repayment of the loan amount, they allegedly threatened him with dire consequences, thereby cheating him. Hence, the present case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner is the wife of the 1st accused, and is a Government employee. A false 2/4

case has been foisted against the petitioner. He, however, submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that there are two accused persons in this case and the petitioner has been arrayed as A2. A1 was arrested on 23.06.2025 and is still in custody. He further submitted that the accused cheated the de-facto complainant by failing to repay the borrowed amount. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also taking note of the fact that a huge sum of money is involved, and that the co-accused was arrested and is still in custody, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 27/06/2025 / TRUE COPY / / /2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

3/4

mkn TO 1.The Inspector of Police, Elumalai Police Station, Madurai District.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10795 of 2025 Date :27/06/2025 PS/16.07.2025 4P/3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4