Madras High Court
CRL OP(MD)/24883/2026 of Vasuki Vs The State of Tamil Nadu rep by , CCB on 2 November 2026
CRL OP(MD) No. 24883 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 02-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
CRL OP(MD) No. 24883 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011383012026}
AND
CRL MP(MD) NO. 23199 OF 2026
Vasuki
W/o.M.Kalaivanan
No.260, Ponvizha Nagar
K.Pudur,
Madurai District.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The State of Tamil Nadu rep by , CCB
Inspector of Police,
Cyber Crime Branch,
Madurai City.
2. Syed Mohamed Ibrahim
S/o.Syed Kasim Ibrahim
No.28/1, 3rd Floor,
Hajimar Street
1st Lane,
Near Koodal Alagar Perumal
Kovil,
Madurai 625 001.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Petition filed under section 528 of BNSS to call for the records relating to the impugned FIR in Crime No. 60 of 2026 on the file of Inspector of Police, CCB Madurai City, quash the same For Petitioner(s)
:Mr.K.Appadurai
For Respondent(s)
:Mr.B.Arun, Govt.Advocate (crl.Side)
For R1
__________
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 02:34:25 pm )
CRL OP(MD) No. 24883 of 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The present petition has been filed by A2 in Cr.No.60 of 2025 on the file of the first respondent police, seeking to quash the FIR, wherein, the petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under sections 420, 465, 468 and 109 of IPC.
2. Perusal of the FIR reveals that the petitioner is the wife of the first accused. Both of them are said to have received a sum of Rs.55,00,000/- from the defacto complainant assuring him to a medical seat in a Government Medical College for his son.
3. It could be further reveals that a fake allotment order from Pondicherry has also been issued by the accused persons in favour of the son of the defacto complainant.
4. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, all the monetary transactions of the defacto complainant were with the first accused and the second accused/petitioner has nothing to do with the offence. __________
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 02:34:25 pm )
CRL OP(MD) No. 24883 of 2026
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.
6. As could be seen from the records, the initial sum of Rs.5,00,000/- has been directly received by the petitioner herein and a sum of Rs.13,00,000/- has been transferred to the joint account of the petitioner and the first accused.
7. In such circumstances, when a prima facie is made out as against the petitioner, the question of interdicting with the investigation does not arise. In such view of the matter, there are no merits in the petition.
8. With the aforesaid observations, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 02-11-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No PNM __________
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 02:34:25 pm )
CRL OP(MD) No. 24883 of 2026 To
1. The Inspector of Police Cyber Crime Branch Madurai City
2. The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Madurai __________
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 02:34:25 pm )
CRL OP(MD) No. 24883 of 2026 R.VIJAYAKUMAR J. PNM CRL OP(MD) No. 24883 of 2026 AND CRL MP(MD) NO. 23199 OF 2026 02-11-2026 __________
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 02:34:25 pm )