Crl.O.P.No.16496 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 08.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Crl.O.P.No.16496 of 2026 Sharmila Soundarrajan ... Petitioner Vs. The State Represented by, The Inspector of Police, CCB-1, Chennai-CCB, Chennai. (Crime No.200 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of her arrest in connection with Crime No.200 of 2025 on the file of respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Elumalai For Respondent : Mr.N.Palanivel, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) O R D E R The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 3(5) and 351(2) of BNS Act, 2023, in Crime No.200 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.16496 of 2026 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with the other accused, joined together and colluded with each other to fabricate various documents, including a death certificate and a legal heirship certificate, while the original owner, Subramaniam, was alive. They subsequently sold the property in favour of the de facto complainant and collected a sum of Rs.1.95 crores, thereby cheating the de facto complainant. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this is a case of impersonation and the FIR came to be registered on 24.11.2025, in connection with which A4, A5, and A6 were taken into custody. Among them, A6 has now been enlarged on statutory bail, while the others remain behind bars. The petitioner is arrayed as A7 and is the wife of A3. The only alleged overt act against the petitioner (A7) is that she received a sum of Rs.5 lakhs. He further submitted that the petitioner’s husband merely acted as a mediator and, beyond that, she had no role to play. He also contended that the original owner of the property had previously given a complaint in which A1 (Priya) was already remanded, and on the very same set of facts, this subsequent case was registered by the purchaser in order to recover his money. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.16496 of 2026 4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed the anticipatory bail application and submitted that there are serious allegations mentioned in the FIR. However, as far as the petitioner is concerned, she being the wife of A3 and arrayed as A7, the only overt act against her is that she received a sum of Rs.5 lakhs in her bank account, which has since been frozen, and beyond that, there is no other overt act alleged against her. 5. Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, including the fact that the petitioner is a woman, that the only allegation against her is the receipt of Rs.5 lakhs with no other overt act pleaded in the FIR, and that the said Rs.5 lakhs has already been frozen by the respondent police, this Court is of the firm view that, at this length of time, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions: 6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate Court exclusively for CCB Cases, on condition 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.16496 of 2026 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 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 daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; (d) 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]; 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.16496 of 2026 (e) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 08.07.2026 cda To 1.The Metropolitan Magistrate Court exclusively for CCB Cases. 2.The Inspector of Police, CCB-1, Chennai-CCB, Chennai. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.16496 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. cda Crl.O.P.No.16496 of 2026 08.07.2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis