Raju Chinniahraj @ Pc Raju v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Fourth day of June Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.1939 of 2021 RAJU CHINNIAHRAJ @ PC RAJU [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, E.O.W-II, KANCHIPURAM, CRIME NO.3/2015 For Petitioner : M/S J.ANTONY JESUS Advocate For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420,406, 506(i) and 120-B of I.P.C and Section 5 of TNPID Act in Crime No.3 of 2015, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner induced the defacto complainant that if he invests money in "Build Rich Investment Group Limited" he can get more returns. Hence the defacto complainant invested Rs.36,00,000/- in the said company, Thereafter, the petitioner failed to return the principal amount as well as the profits and threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that the petitioner cheated the defacto complainant to tune of Rs.36,00,000/- and also threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the nature of offence committed by the petitioner and the amount involved is very high, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

-sd/- 24/06/2021 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, E.O.W-II, KANCHIPURAM.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S J.ANTONY JESUS Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.1939/2021 Date :24/06/2021 RVR 16/07/2021