Priyadharshini vs The State Rep. By Its The Inspector Of ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2576 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2576 Mad
Judgement Date : 14 May, 2026

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Priyadharshini vs The State Rep. By Its The Inspector Of ... on 14 May, 2026

                                                                           CRL OP No. 12905 of 2026


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                                                   DATED: 14-05-2026
                                                       CORAM
                                    THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL
                                               CRL OP No. 12905 of 2026
                Priyadharshini

                                                                                 ..Petitioner(s)
                                                          Vs
                The State Represented by its
                The Inspector of Police,
                Semmanchery Police,
                Chengalpattu District,
                Crime No. 36/2026
                                                                               ..Respondent(s)

                Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 483 of BNSS,
                2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.36/2026 on the file of the
                Inspector of Police, Semmanchery Police Station.


                              For Petitioner(s):       Mr.D.Jaiganesh

                              For Respondent(s):       Mr.R.Vinothraja,
                                                       Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

                                                        ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

26.02.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 127(2), 115(2), 308(4),

308(5), 308(6), 310(2), 311 and 351(3) of BNS in Cr. No.36 of 2026 on the file

of the respondent police, seeks bail.

__________ Page1 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is a

suspended Tahsildar, who had been communicating with the accused through a

Tinder application and that the accused lured the defacto complainant and asked

him to come to a hotel at 7 stone Stays located in Sholingnallur on 17.02.2026

and cheated the defacto complainant and robbed 25 sovereigns of gold jewels

from him. Hence, the case was registered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent

police have registered a false case against the petitioner. The petitioner is under

judicial custody since 26.02.2026. He would also submit that there is no

previous case pending as against the petitioner. Therefore, he prayed to grant

bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) reiterated the

prosecution case and submitted that the stolen jewel has been recovered and that

there is no previous case pending as against the petitioner. However, he

vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made on either side, the nature of

the offences alleged against the accused, and that the stolen jewel has been

__________ Page2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

recovered, and taking into account that there are no previous cases pending as

against the petitioner, and considering the period of judicial custody undergone

by her, 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 to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate,

Sholinganallur 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 offence similar to

the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, or of the

commission of which she is suspected;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during

investigation or trial;

[e] 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 him from disclosing such facts

to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the

learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take

__________ Page3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

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].

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be

registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.

14-05-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

TSG

Note:

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

__________ Page4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

1. The Inspector of Police, Semmanchery Police, Chengalpattu District,

2. The Judicial Magistrate, Sholinganallur.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

4.The Superintendent, Central Prison-III, Puzhal.

__________ Page5 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

P.DHANABAL, J.

TSG

14-05-2026

__________ Page6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis