Nisha @ Vilvanisha vs State Of Tamilnadu

K.Rajasekar, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 24.09.2025 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 316, 318(4), 333, 351(2) and 238 of BNS in Cr.No.493 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that this petitioner is ranked as A1. The petitioner along with others conspired with a view to avail huge loan amount by using the names of the defacto complainant and other persons, opened various bank accounts without the knowledge of the defacto complainant, and filed GST Returns as if they are doing some business and they are having a huge turnover for the purpose of getting huge bank loan. Accordingly, they have also filed returns, and before obtaining loan, their operation came to light to the defacto complainant. Hence, the complaint was lodged against the petitioner.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner along with others have conducted business with the knowledge of the defacto complainant. Though it is stated that they have opened bank accounts, they are not benefited and they have not cheated any persons on monetary wise and they have not caused any loss to any persons. He further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 24.09.2025 and ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and one of the co-accused was enlarged on bail. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and reported that totally there are four accused involved in this case. On investigation, it is revealed that the accused persons have colluded and opened various accounts in the name of the defacto complainant and they have also filed GST returns, showing several crores as their turn over and attempted to avail loan and also attempted to cheat the GST Department. He further submitted that the investigation is likely to be transferred to the file of Cyber Crime in this regard. Hence, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

I have considered the submissions made by both sides and the materials available on records revealed that the petitioner joining hands with other accused, planned to avail huge loan from the Bank, based on returns filed on the name of the defacto complainant and before they could obtain loan, they have been exposed and now the accused persons are in custody. The co-accused has also been enlarged on bail. Hence, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on her executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate-III, Tiruppur and on further conditions that:

[a] 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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioner shall make herself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required;

[d] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses;

[e] the petitioner to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard;

[f] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.