Allowed

Meena v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Tirunelveli Taluk

Madras HC25 Oct 2025CRL OP(MD)/8662/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail sought by the second accused in a case alleging collection of Rs.41,78,000 on the pretext of securing railway appointments. The court made the interim anticipatory bail absolute, granting bail on conditions including daily reporting to police and cooperation with investigation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on execution of Rs.10,000 bond with like sureties, subject to conditions including daily reporting to respondent police until further orders.

Meena Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police… — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.8662 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.10.2025

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

¶5

CRL OP(MD) NO. 8662 of 2025

¶6

..Petitioner/A2

¶7

¶8

State Of Tamilnadu, Rep By The Inspector Of Police, Tirunelveli Taluk Police Station,

¶9

Tirunelveli District.

¶10

(Crime No.251 of 2025)

¶11

Respondent(s)

¶12

For Petitioner(s):

¶13

Mr.C.Saravanakumar

¶14

For Respondent(s):

¶15

Mr.E.Antony Sahaya prabahar Additional Public Prosecutor

¶16

For intervener : Mr.Suresh manickam

¶17

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS

¶18

PRAYER :-

¶19

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.251 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.

¶20

1/8

¶21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

CRL OP(MD). No.8662 of 2025

¶23

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶24

The petitioner/A2, who apprehends arrest at

¶25

offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 336(2), 336(3) and 340(2) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.251 of 2025 on the file of the

¶26

respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶27

petitioner and other accused have received the amount of Rs.41,78,000/- from the defacto complainant on the pretext of getting appointment at Railway Department. Hence, a case was registered.

¶28

petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He, however, submitted that the petitioner is willing

¶29

2/8

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

CRL OP(MD). No.8662 of 2025

¶32

to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by

¶33

this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail.

¶34

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor

¶35

submitted that there are no previous cases pending against the petitioner. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶36

Taking into consideration of the facts and

¶37

circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and the interim anticipatory bail already granted is made absolute, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions

¶38

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to

¶39

be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order,

¶40

3/8

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶42

CRL OP(MD). No.8662 of 2025

¶43

before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirunelveli, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand only) with sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirunelveli, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

¶44

(a) the petitioner and the sureties shall

¶45

affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

¶46

(b) the petitioner shall furnish his

¶47

residential address and mobile number to the

¶48

learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirunelveli.

¶49

4/8

¶50

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶51

CRL OP(MD). No.8662 of 2025

¶52

In the event of any change in his residential

¶53

address, the petitioner shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirunelveli;

¶54

¶55

respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., unti further orders and cooperate with the investigation;

¶56

evidence or witness either during investigation

¶57

or trial;

¶58

(e) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶59

conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against 5/8

¶60

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶61

CRL OP(MD). No.8662 of 2025

¶62

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] and;

¶63

(g) if the accused/petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.

25.10.2025

vsg

6/8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶68

CRL OP(MD). No.8662 of 2025

¶69

¶70

1.The learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirunelveli .

¶71

The Inspector Of Police, Tirunelveli Taluk Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

¶72

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

¶73

7/8

¶74

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶75

CRL OP(MD). No.8662 of 2025

¶76

S.SRIMATHY.J.,

¶77

vsg

¶78

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8662 of 2025

¶79

Date : 25.10.2025

¶80

8/8

¶81

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Meena v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Tirunelveli Taluk

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meena v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Tirunelveli Taluk

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajkumar Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch

R.Nirmal Raj Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

T.Jeyakumar Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by The Inspector of Police

Murugesan Vs the State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by The Inspector of Police

V.Tamil Selvan Vs The State of Tamilnadu

Dinesh Raj @ Dhinesh Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Thattarmadam