Purusothaman v. The State Rep By Its

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Seventh day of January Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V. THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.254 of 2022 PURUSOTHAMAN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP BY ITS [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH-I, CHENNAI DISTRICT.

CR.NO.304/2020.

For Petitioner : M/S.A.YAMUNA Advocate For Respondent : MR. N.S.SUGANTHAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- (The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 10.11.2021 for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 109 & 34 of IPC, in Crime No.304 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused by misusing the name of the former Deputy Chief Minister of Tamilnadu, making a false promise of securing a job in TNEB as Assistant Engineer, has received a huge amount to the tune of Rs.16 lakhs from the de facto complainant. But, the petitioner and other accused neither secured the job nor returned the money. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is in no way connected with the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case and that he has been suffering incarceration for more than 55 days from 10.11.2021 and hence, he would pray for grant of bail to the petitioner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would raise a strong objection stating that totally 2 accused are involved in this case and that the petitioner is arrayed as A2. He would further submit that the petitioner by giving a false promise of getting a job in TNEB as Assistant Engineer has received a sum of Rs.16 lakhs and that the amount also not recovered, A1 is still absconding. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case that more than Rs.15 lakhs is involved and one more accused is yet to be secured and further the case needs a detail investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

-sd/- 07/01/2022 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH-I, CHENNAI DISTRICT.

2 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL, CHENNAI.

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.G.ARUN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.254/2022 Date :07/01/2022 INBA~20/01/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/