Kumaramurugan v. The Inspector Of Police

Crl.O.P.No.10664 of 2016 B.GOKULDAS, J.

The petitioner, who was arrested on 29.03.2016, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.486 of 2016, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks bail.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner / Accused and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the State.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, on promising to obtain a M.D. seat in Balaji Medical College, Chennai, received a sum of Rs.30 Lakhs from the defacto complainant, but the petitioner neither obtained the seat nor refunded the money.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are friends and they are members of the same political party. The petitioner obtained Rs.3 Lakhs by way of loan from the defacto complainant in the year 2013 and handed over a blank cheque as security. Subsequently, the said amount of Rs.3 Lakhs has been returned back to the defacto complainant by way of fund transfer through bank. Now by using the aforesaid blank cheque, as if the petitioner has cheated the complainant, the present complaint has been lodged. He further submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody for more than 57 days.

B.GOKULDAS, J.

ajr/adl

5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the State submitted that the earlier application filed by the petitioner was dismissed on merit and there is no change of circumstances for filing this second petition.

6. The learned counsel for the intervener reiterated the allegations made in the complaint. He further submitted that the petitioner neither obtained M.D.seat nor returned back the money to the complainant. He further submitted that he is a habitual offender of cheating.

7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the period of custody, the gravity of the offence, the stage of the investigation and the fact that there is no change of circumstances after the dismissal of the first petition, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

25.05.2016 ajr/adl Crl.O.P.No.10664 of 2016