CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026 Ranjitha ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, CCB, Tambaram, Chennai. ..Respondent(s) E.G.Saminathan ..Intervener(s) [Permitted to intervene vide order dated 09.06.2026 made in Crl.MP.No.9166/2026 in Crl.OP.No.12248/2026] Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on Anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.95 of 2026 on the file of Respondent Police pending investigation. For Petitioner(s): Mr.Jawahar R For Respondent(s): Mr.N.Palanivel Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For Intervener(s): Mr.M.Venktesh __________ Page1 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026 ORDER The petitioner, apprehending arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.95 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution, as seen from the FIR, is that certain financial transactions and alleged cheating activities were carried out. The petitioner's husband and the defacto complainant were known to each other, and it is alleged that the petitioner’s husband induced the defacto complainant to part with money for a trading business. Subsequently, the husband of the petitioner allegedly cheated the defacto complainant to the tune of Rs.13 Crores. Hence, the case has been registered. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent of the allegations and has been falsely implicated. He further submitted that the prime accused (A1), who is the husband of the petitioner, was already arrested and subsequently released on bail by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu, in Crl.M.P.No.1672 of 2026 dated 04.06.2026. He contended that since her husband has already been enlarged on bail, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is unwarranted. He emphasized that the petitioner is a woman and has nothing to do with the alleged business transactions of her husband. He further submitted that she is ready to abide by __________ Page2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026 any condition imposed by this Court and to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail

4. The learned counsel appearing for the intervening petitioner / defacto complainant vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail and did not seriously dispute the factum of bail granted to A1. However, he contended that the husband of the petitioner has cheated him of a huge amount of money and contended that unless this petitioner is secured in custody, it will be highly difficult for the investigating agency to trace and find out the cheated money 5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner's husband (A1) had already been taken into police custody and was in jail for a long period of time before being enlarged on bail. He further fairly submitted that the custodial interrogation of this female petitioner is not strictly required. Apart from that, he conceded that the entire material allegation is directed only against A1, and there is no specific allegation of overt acts or misappropriation as against this petitioner. 6. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side. __________ Page3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the gender of the petitioner, the submission made by the learned Government Advocate that the entire allegation is targeted against A1 and that there is no material allegation against this petitioner, and the fact that her husband has already suffered incarceration and been released on regular bail, this Court is of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Taking into the totality of the circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions. 8. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the copy of this order is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: (a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The __________ Page4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026 learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity; (c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one week and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; (d) The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (d) The petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; (e) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; (f) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act; 09-06-2026 (2/2) Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No Jeni To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu. 2.The Inspector of Police, CCB, Tambaram, Chennai. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai. __________ Page5 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. Jeni CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026 09-06-2026 (2/2) __________ Page6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026 Ranjitha ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, CCB, Tambaram, Chennai. ..Respondent(s) E.G.Saminathan ..Intervener(s) [Permitted to intervene vide order dated 09.06.2026 made in Crl.MP.No.9166/2026 in Crl.OP.No.12248/2026] Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on Anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.95 of 2026 on the file of Respondent Police pending investigation. For Petitioner(s): Mr.Jawahar R For Respondent(s): Mr.N.Palanivel Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For Intervener(s): Mr.M.Venktesh __________ Page1 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026 ORDER The petitioner, apprehending arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.95 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution, as seen from the FIR, is that certain financial transactions and alleged cheating activities were carried out. The petitioner's husband and the defacto complainant were known to each other, and it is alleged that the petitioner’s husband induced the defacto complainant to part with money for a trading business. Subsequently, the husband of the petitioner allegedly cheated the defacto complainant to the tune of Rs.13 Crores. Hence, the case has been registered. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent of the allegations and has been falsely implicated. He further submitted that the prime accused (A1), who is the husband of the petitioner, was already arrested and subsequently released on bail by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu, in Crl.M.P.No.1672 of 2026 dated 04.06.2026. He contended that since her husband has already been enlarged on bail, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is unwarranted. He emphasized that the petitioner is a woman and has nothing to do with the alleged business transactions of her husband. He further submitted that she is ready to abide by __________ Page2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026 any condition imposed by this Court and to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail

4. The learned counsel appearing for the intervening petitioner / defacto complainant vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail and did not seriously dispute the factum of bail granted to A1. However, he contended that the husband of the petitioner has cheated him of a huge amount of money and contended that unless this petitioner is secured in custody, it will be highly difficult for the investigating agency to trace and find out the cheated money 5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner's husband (A1) had already been taken into police custody and was in jail for a long period of time before being enlarged on bail. He further fairly submitted that the custodial interrogation of this female petitioner is not strictly required. Apart from that, he conceded that the entire material allegation is directed only against A1, and there is no specific allegation of overt acts or misappropriation as against this petitioner. 6. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side. __________ Page3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the gender of the petitioner, the submission made by the learned Government Advocate that the entire allegation is targeted against A1 and that there is no material allegation against this petitioner, and the fact that her husband has already suffered incarceration and been released on regular bail, this Court is of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Taking into the totality of the circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions. 8. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the copy of this order is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: (a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The __________ Page4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026 learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity; (c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one week and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; (d) The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (d) The petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; (e) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; (f) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act; 09-06-2026 (2/2) Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No Jeni To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu. 2.The Inspector of Police, CCB, Tambaram, Chennai. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai. __________ Page5 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. Jeni CRL OP No. 12248 of 2026 09-06-2026 (2/2) __________ Page6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis