Madras High CourtCRL OP/485/2022dismissed

Murugesan v. The Inspector Of Police

2022-01-11Honourable Mrs Justice T.V.Thamilselvi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Eleventh day of January Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V. THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.485 of 2022 MURUGESAN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE [ RESPONDENT ] DCB POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO. 21 OF 2021) For Petitioner : M/S. C.D.SUGUMAR 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 petitioner who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.10.2021 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 506(ii), 307, 406, 420, 419, 489B, 489C, 120B of IPC and Section 25(1A) of Arms Act in Crime No.21 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant's friend introduced A4 to the defacto complainant and A4 informed that one Rice Fulling Article, for which, they demanded a sum of Rs.22.50 lakhs. Believing their words, the defacto complainant gave amount to the accused persons on various dates and thereafter, the defacto complainant demanded them to show the Collector's Order for the said Rice Fulling Article. At that time, there arose some wordy altercation between them. The defacto complainant demanded return of his money. It is further alleged that the accused persons returned a sum of Rs.5.0 lakhs to the defacto complainant. On verification, the said notes are fake one. Hence, the complaint. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is no way connected with the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration for more than 79 days from 22.10.2021 and hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would raise strong objection stating that totally, there are eight accused involved in this case, the petitioner is arrayed as A3. A4 and A8 were absconding and A6 and A7 were enlarged on bail by Principal District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore and further states that the investigation yet to be completed.

5. Considering the gravity of offence alleged, considering the alleged overt act of the petitioner, quantum of counterfeit notes involved in this case and the investigation is not yet completed which needs detailed investigation, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 11/01/2022 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 DCB POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE DISTRICT.

2 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, COIMBATORE.

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S. C.D.SUGUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.485/2022 Date :11/01/2022 JPA 21/01/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/