Priya v. The State Rep.By, the Inspector of Police,

ORDER The prayer made in the Criminal Original Petition is to quash the FIR in Crime No.78 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police, registered for the offences under section 316(2) & 318(4) of BNS, 2023.

¶2The gist of allegation is that the accused are running an organization in the name and style of Young Sports of India and, in the name of getting a job for sports persons, they had obtained money from the de facto complainant and thereafter, cheated the de facto complainant. The petitioner is arrayed as Accused No.3.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that except to make a statement that this petitioner was also there when the de facto complainant came to the Office, there is nothing else to connect the de facto complainant with the incident. As a matter of fact, the petitioner herein is employed with one Aspire Group of Consultancy and she also has the identity card as well as the offer of employment with reference to the said period with the 3rd person. Even the tabular column that is mentioned in the FIR, no amount has been credited to any of the account of this Accused.

¶4I have considered the said submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Page3 of 4

¶5When the averment is made by the de facto complaint at the time of lodging the complaint that the petitioner is also responsible for running of the Agency, it is not expected of the Investigating Officer to pronounce upon the said allegations at the time of registering of the FIR itself. When the allegations are made, the case is registered and the investigation is proceeded, the version of the petitioner is her defence version that she is no way connected with the said agency and no money was received in her account and that she is employed elsewhere and she is only the friend of the first accused, it will be open for the petitioner to place such materials before the Investigating officer during the course of the investigation and at the early stage, based on such factual assertion on the petitioner, this Court cannot interfere in the investigation and quash the investigation at this stage.

¶6In view thereof, keeping open the liberty of the petitioner to make such contentions at the appropriate stage, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 16-07-2026 KKN Page4 of 4

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. KKN To

¶1The Inspector of Police, Shankar Nagar Police Station, Pammal, Chennai – 600 075.

¶2The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai. 16-07-2026

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 16-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and Crl.M.P.No. 12344 of 2026 Priya, D/o. Vasudevan, No.3(1), Agananuru 1st Cross Street, Tirumullaivoyal, Sri Sakthi Nagar, Annanur, Railway Carshed Complex, Chennai - 600 109. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Shankar Nagar Police Station, Pammal, Chennai – 600 075. 2. Logeshkumar No.10, Pillaiyar Kovil Street (New Street), Kilithanpattarai, Katpadi, Vellore – 632007. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the records pertaining to the FIR dated 04-02-2025 in Crime No.78 of 2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Shankar Nagar Police Station, Pammal, Chennai and quash the same and pass such further or other orders as this Honorable may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s): MR.M.S.SWATHISHKUMAR For Respondent(s): MR.R.RAJASEKARAN COUNSEL FOR GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU (CRIMINAL SIDE) FOR R1 Page2 of 4