Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/19338/2025disposed of

N.Swetha v. The State Of Tamilnadu, Represented By The Deputy Superintendent Of Police,

2025-11-04Honourable Mrs Justice S.Srimathy4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 04/11/2025 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY CRL OP(MD)No.19338 of 2025 N.Swetha, W/o.Rajadurai, 1/455A, A.S.V.Puram, Venkateswara Mills near Udumalpet, Tiruppur District .. Petitioner/A5 Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep, By the Deputy Superintendent of Police, E.O.W.II, Pudukottai, Pudukottai District.

In Crime No.3 of 2023. .. Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.A.Balaji, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mrs.M.Aasha, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR LOWER COURT BAIL MODIFICATION Under Sec.483(1)(b) r/w 528 of BNSS PRAYER :- Criminal Original Petition is filed to modify the condition imposed in Cr.M.P.No.351 of 2025 dated 26.06.2025 on the file of the learned Special Judge 1/4

under the Tamilnadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1997, Madurai, insofar as "the petitioner should sign before the respondent police at 10.00 A.M., on the 1st and 15th day of every English Calendar Month until further orders".

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- This petition has been filed to modify the condition imposed in Cr.M.P.No.351 of 2025 dated 26.06.2025 on the file of the learned Special Judge under the Tamilnadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1997, Madurai

2. Heard the learned counsel on both sides and perused the materials available on record.

3. The petitioner is A3 in the case. A2 is her husband and he died. A1 is the company. There are other accused upto the rank of A15. According to the petitioner, A6 & A7 who are staying away from Tamilnadu are the real owners. It is seen that the petitioner reported before the respondent police for 2/4

33 days daily and thereafter, appeared monthly once for 10 months, and thereafter, monthly twice for 10 times. Inspite of the same, the prosecution states the investigation is not completed and further, the prosecution stated that the petitioner is not cooperated with the investigation. But according to the petitioner, A6 & A7 are the real owners who are doing online trading and as on today they have not been secured at all. The prosecution has not taken any steps against to secure them. Therefore, the condition imposed against the petitioner is relaxed and the petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent police as and when required. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of.

04.11.2025 (2/2) PJL To 1.The Sessions Judge, Special Court under the Tamilnadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1997, Madurai.

3/4

S.SRIMATHY,J PJL 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, E.O.W.II, Pudukottai, Pudukottai District.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.19338 of 2025 Date : 04/11/2025 (2/2) 4/4