Madras High CourtCRL OP/1633/2020dismissed

A.Anilkumar v. State Represented By

2020-02-03Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Third day of February Two Thousand Twenty PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.1633 of 2020 A.ANILKUMAR [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REPRESENTED BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ECONOMIC OFFENCES WING, COIMBATORE.

CRIME NO.06/2019.

For Petitioner : M/S. R.MARUDHACHALAMURTHY Advocate For Respondent : MR. C.IYYAPPARAJ, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused introduced an attractive scheme for the investors, by which, the defcto complainant including 234 victims were lured and as per sweet words quoted by the petitioner and other accused, they invested in the share market, and thereafter, the innocent victims neither received any returns nor get their repayment and later, they came to know that they were cheated.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner did not commit the said offences as alleged by the prosecution and that a concern, namely, V.V.Traders introduced the said scheme and the petitioner advised the defacto complainant to enquiry the scheme announced by the said concern before depositing the money and the prime accused only insisted the defacto complainant to deposit the money.

3. The learned APP would submit that totally 234 victims have been cheated and a tune of Rs.2.34 crores are involved and the petitioner and other accused collected huge amounts from the innocent victims and parted away the same and investigation is pending. Hence he opposed for grant of bail.

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

4. Considering the nature of the offence committed by the petitioner that he along with other accused cheated the number of innocent victims and considering the quantum of amount involved in this crime, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Crl.Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 03/02/2020 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 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ECONOMIC OFFENCES WING, COIMBATORE.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+1 CC to M/S. R.MARUDHACHALAMURTHY Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.2064 CRL OP.1633/2020 Date :03/02/2020 TA-13/02/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/