Dhilipan V v. State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police

CRL OP NO. 1646 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24-01-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP NO. 1646 of 2025 Dhilipan V S/o.Vimalasekar, 1, Veerakanda Vinayagar Street, Senjai, Karaikudi Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police CCD-II Police Station, Salem District (Crime. No. 8 of 2024) Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):

C S Saravanan C S T. Sudhan Raj Amala Ananthi M.Vignesh For Respondent(s):

S.Santhosh Government Advocate (criminal Side) Madras High Court.

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 420 IPC and Section 66D of Information Technology (Amendment) Act 2008 INF C in Crime No.8 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent

and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case, based on the confession of arrested accused. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to produce solvent sureties and to abide with any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, therefore, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 3.The case of the prosecution as putforth by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police who is opposing for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, is that the petitioner induced the defacto complainant to join online trading business and received a sum of Rs.8,51,525/- and cheated the defacto complainant. He further submitted that A1 is still in the custody.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record including the FIR.

5. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary and hence, this Court is not inclined to

grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. 24-01-2025 msv To The Inspector Of Police CCD-II Police Station, Salem District