Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 34329 (MAD)

Jeeva Hermana v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police,

CRL OP(MD)/10740/2026 · 2026-06-12

P Dhanabal

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRL OP(MD). No.10740 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 12.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No.10740 of 2026 Jeeva Hermana ...Petitioner/Accused Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police Station, Thoothukudi District. (Crime No.13 of 2025) ...Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.B.N.Raja Mohamed For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For Intervenor : Mr.S.M.A.Jinnah, Advocate PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No.13 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / A1, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.03.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10740 of 2026 294(b) and 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.13 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant pledged her jewels and properties in her name and her mother's name with Annai Finance which is run by the accused persons and thereafter the defacto complainant repaid a sum of Rs.43,41,029/- on several dates and requested the accused persons to return the jewels for the aforesaid amount for which the accused persons stated that they would return the jewels if the entire amount was repaid and hence on 23.10.2024 when the defacto complainant approached the finance company with the full amount to redeem the jewels and properties, the accused persons refused to return them and abused her in filthy language. Hence the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that based on the complaint lodged by the defacto complainant the respondent police registered a false case in Crime No.13 of 2025 for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 294(b) and 506(i) of IPC. As per the case of prosecution the defacto complainant pledged her 135 gold sovereigns to obtain loan on various dates to the tune of Rs.43,41,029/-, there are money transactions 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10740 of 2026 between them. While so when the defacto complainant after repayment of entire amount demanded to return back the ornaments and the title deeds they failed to return the documents and thereby lodged the complaint. Infact the defacto complainant had only paid part amount and suppressing the above said facts the present complaint has been lodged. He would further submit that already this Court has granted interim bail to the petitioner directing her to deposit the title deeds for a sum of Rs.50 lakhs as a security but the petitioner is unable to comply with the conditions and once again she was remanded to judicial custody and now she is custody for more then 87 days and therefore prayed to grant bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor would submit that the defacto complainant pledged jewels with annai finance and thereafter repaid the entire amount on various dates along with interest. After repayment of money the petitioner failed to return 135 sovereigns of gold jewels which were pledged. Huge amount involved in this case. Already this Court has granted interim anticipatory bail by directing the petitioner to deposit title deeds of properties worth about Rs.50 lakhs and the said condition has not been complied with, therefore bail already granted to the petitioner was cancelled since the petitioner has not complied with the 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10740 of 2026 condition as directed by this Court and hence she is not entitled for bail, thereby prayed to dismiss the bail petition. 5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that accused persons after receiving the amount from the defacto complainant refused to return back the gold jewels which were pledged by the defacto complainant. He would further submit that huge amount involved in this case. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner. 6. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 7. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and considering the nature of offences and also the fact there is a dispute between the parties in respect of redeeming the pledged gold jewels and according to the defacto complainant 135 sovereigns of gold jewels were pledged and obtained loan of Rs.49,95,000/- and the same was also repaid and even after repayment the accused persons failed to return back the said jewels, but the petitioner/accused has not disputed the pledged 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10740 of 2026 jewels and according to the petitioner the defacto complainant has not paid the full payment. Though this Court earlier recorded that the learned counsel accused persons would submit that out of 135 sovereigns of gold jewels they have already repaid part of the jewels for which amount has been paid and for remaining 115 gms of gold jewels she had paid Rs.53 lakhs with interest there are no records to show the quantum of jewels, thereby the disputed facts can be considered during trial. Already this Court has granted interim bail on condition to deposit title deeds worth about Rs.50 lakhs but the said condition has not been complied with and therefore interim bail granted to the petitioner was cancelled and again she was remanded to judicial custody and now she is in custody and material part of the investigation was already completed and though this Court has imposed condition while granting bail she was unable to comply with the condition and she is in custody for more than 87 days and also taking into consideration the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner and also considering all other factors, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on 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 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10740 of 2026 to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Thoothukudi and on further conditions that: b) The petitioner is directed to file an affidavit about the available jewels with her before the trial Court within one month from the date of release on bail and based on the said evidence the trial Court is directed to pass appropriate order at the time of final disposal of the case. [c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [d] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which she is suspected; [e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [f] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; [g] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10740 of 2026 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]. [h] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS. (P D B J) 12.06.2026 aav To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.IV,Thoothukudi 2. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police Station, Thoothukudi District. 3. The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Kokkirakulam, Tirunelveli District 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10740 of 2026 P. DHANABAL, J aav ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 10740 of 2026 Date : 12.06.2026 8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis