CRL OP(MD). No.10521 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 09/06/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No.10521 of 2026 Kalai Selvi.B ... Petitioner/Rank Not Known Vs State of Tamil Nadu, Rep By, The Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Wing, Tiruchirappalli, Tiruchirappalli District. Crime No. 72/2026. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 72/2026 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Thiruvadi Kumar A, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :-1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10521 of 2026 The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 66D & 84B of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, in Crime No.72 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons received a sum of Rs.76,72,102/- by giving a false promise that he would get huge profit in the investment of Bitcoin. Thereafter, the accused neither gave the profit amount nor paid the principal amount. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and she was falsely implicated in this case and she has no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that the co-accused was already released on bail and the petitioner herein being wife of A1, she was arrayed as accused and already a part of the amount was paid to the defacto complainant. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the accused persons received a sum of Rs.76,72,102/- by giving a 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10521 of 2026 false promise that he would get huge profit in the investment of Bitcoin and the investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He would further submit that the co-accused was already released on bail. 5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, and the co-accused was already released on bail and the entire allegation as against the husband of the petitioner and already a part of the amount was repaid and the alleged occurrence was took place on 07.05.2025 and FIR was registered on 25.04.2026, by this time, the material part of the investigation might have been completed, 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 bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10521 of 2026 Magistrate No.V, Tiruchirappalli, on condition that the petitioner 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police, daily 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 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10521 of 2026 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. 09.06.2026 dss To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.V, Tiruchirappalli. 2.The Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Wing, Tiruchirappalli, Tiruchirappalli District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10521 of 2026 P. DHANABAL,J DSS ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.10521 of 2026 Date : 09/06/2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRL OP(MD). No.10521 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 09/06/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No.10521 of 2026 Kalai Selvi.B ... Petitioner/Rank Not Known Vs State of Tamil Nadu, Rep By, The Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Wing, Tiruchirappalli, Tiruchirappalli District. Crime No. 72/2026. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 72/2026 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Thiruvadi Kumar A, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :-1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10521 of 2026 The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 66D & 84B of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, in Crime No.72 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons received a sum of Rs.76,72,102/- by giving a false promise that he would get huge profit in the investment of Bitcoin. Thereafter, the accused neither gave the profit amount nor paid the principal amount. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and she was falsely implicated in this case and she has no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that the co-accused was already released on bail and the petitioner herein being wife of A1, she was arrayed as accused and already a part of the amount was paid to the defacto complainant. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the accused persons received a sum of Rs.76,72,102/- by giving a 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10521 of 2026 false promise that he would get huge profit in the investment of Bitcoin and the investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He would further submit that the co-accused was already released on bail. 5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, and the co-accused was already released on bail and the entire allegation as against the husband of the petitioner and already a part of the amount was repaid and the alleged occurrence was took place on 07.05.2025 and FIR was registered on 25.04.2026, by this time, the material part of the investigation might have been completed, 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 bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10521 of 2026 Magistrate No.V, Tiruchirappalli, on condition that the petitioner 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police, daily 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 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10521 of 2026 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. 09.06.2026 dss To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.V, Tiruchirappalli. 2.The Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Wing, Tiruchirappalli, Tiruchirappalli District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10521 of 2026 P. DHANABAL,J DSS ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.10521 of 2026 Date : 09/06/2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis