B.Jayalekshmi v. The Commissioner Of Police,

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420 and 465 of IPC in Crime No.311 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the founder of a Trust, namely Sneham Trust, which is a social welfare organization. She has diverted the funds of the de-facto complainant viz., Sneham Foundation by using their name. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He would also submit that, in fact, the petitioner is running a trust in the name of Sneham Trust, hence, she is no way connected with the Sneham Foundation, which belongs to the de-facto complainant. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that under the name of Sneham Foundation, which belongs to the de-facto complainant, the petitioner is collecting money from public. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents police and perused the materials available on record.

6.On a perusal of the documents filed by the petitioner at page Nos.39 and 41 of the typed set of papers, which are the photographs submitted by the petitioner, it is clear that the petitioner has used the name of the de-facto complainant. In another photographs, where the petitioner showing a poster, in which, it was printed as "Sneham Foundation, Chennai". 7.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the gravity of the offence and that a prima case is established

that the petitioner is collecting money from the public by using the name of the de-facto complainant, this Court feels that a detailed enquiry is required in this matter. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 24.02.2023 sp

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

sp 24.02.2023