Priya v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Ccb

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20/04/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Priya, D/o. Velusamy, No.Eswb 2288 B,Gandhi Ma Nagar, Ganapathy, Coimbatore.. ... Petitioner/Accused No.2 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, CCB Police Station, Trichy City. In Crime No. 31 of 2025.. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.A.Vignesh, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- C-24AB. For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 31 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused No.2, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 468, 471, 120B and 34 of IPC, in Crime No.31 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons told the defacto complainant that their relatives were working in PWD, Chennai and believing their words, the de facto complainant paid a sum of Rs. 39,45,000/- to secure employment in PWD, Chennai. The accused persons then provided appointment orders to seven persons. Thereafter, she neither secure job nor repaid the amount. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and she was falsely implicated in this case and she is no way connected in the above said incident. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and the petitioner has no previous cases. However, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

¶6Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioners and there was a money dispute pending between the parties and the material part of the investigation might have been completed and the alleged occurrence took place on 06.08.2021, however the date of FIR is on 26.11.2025 and hence, there is a delay in filing FIR and no steps have been taken to secure the accused persons and the petitioner has no previous cases, 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.I, Trichy, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police once in a week ie., on Every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [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 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/petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S. (P D B J)

20.04.2026 VSG TO

1.The learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Trichy.

2.The Inspector of Police, CCB Police Station, Trichy City.

¶3The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. P. DHANABAL,J., vsg ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.7704 of 2026 Date : 20/04/2026