Srinivasa Moorthy v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Seventh day of January Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V.THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.1026 of 2022 SRINIVASA MOORTHY [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT.

CR NO.80/2021.

For Petitioner : MR.S.N.ARUN KUMAR, Advocate for M/S.R.SURESH KUMAR Advocate For Respondent : M/S.A.GOKULAKRISHNAN, Additional Public Prosecutor For Intervener : MR.K.G.SENTLHIL KUMAR, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Section 406, 420, 465, 468 and 506(i) of IPC in Crime No.80 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with others cheated the defacto complainant by receiving a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- on the assurance of securing a job for the son of the defacto complainant in the Railway Department.

It is further alleged that the defacto complainant introduced various persons who paid total amount of Rs.58,71,000/-. Thereafter, an appointment order from Western Railway was given for Kalasi Job at Ratlan Railway Station at Gujarat and when the defacto complainant verified with the Railway Department, he came to know that he was cheated by the petitioner. The defacto complainant demanded to repay the money, due to which, the petitioner along with others criminally intimidated him. Hence, the complaint.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, the learned counsel prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl side) on instructions submits that the petitioner along with others have cheated many persons to the tune of Rs.58,71,000/- .

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the submissions made by both counsel and also considering the fact that the huge amount was involved in this case which needs detail investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6.Accordingly, the Criminal original petition is dismissed. -sd/- 27/01/2022 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, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.R.SURESH KUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.1026/2022 Date :27/01/2022 TA-04/02/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/