K.Pramila Devi v. State Represented By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Fourth day of February Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice R. PONGIAPPAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.2400 of 2022 K.PRAMILA DEVI [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs 1 STATE REPRESENTED BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CCB TEAM - II, CHENNAI- 600 007.

(CRIME NO. 119 OF 2021) 2 THE SUB REGISTRAR, AMBATTUR, CHENNAI.

( R2 SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN CRL OP.2400/2022.DATED 03/02/2022) For Petitioner : M/S V.RAMANAREDDY Advocate For Respondent : Mrs.G.V.KASTHURI, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 15.12.2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 r/w. Section 120B of IPC in Crime No.119 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused created fabricated documents and grabbed the property of the de facto complainant. Further, the accused have obtained loan to the tune of Rs.51 lakhs. Hence, the complaint. 3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and she has been falsely implicated in this case. She would further submit that, though the amount which is paid by the purchaser was transferred to the

petitioner's account, the same was swindled by the other accused and afterwards, the other accused cheated the petitioner also. It is his specific submission that though this Court granted interim bail on 03.02.2022, he has not been released and is in judicial custody from 15.12.2021. Hence, he prays for bail.

4.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police raised objection stating that investigation is pending. It is her case that during the time of occurrence, the petitioner created a bogus identification card and with the help of the same, the other accused created a bogus Power of Attorney and afterwards by using the same, the property under dispute was sold to third party.

5.

Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side. The respondent police registered a case against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 r/w. Section 120B of IPC. The submission made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would reveals the fact that the petitioner has played a key role in the alleged occurrence. As of now, it is admitted on the other side that Rs. 64 lakhs was transferred to the petitioner's account and thereafter, the same has not been recovered, further the petitioner is not willing to deposit the said amount. Apart from that, the petitioner is having two previous cases of similar nature.

6.

Therefore, taking into consideration the above aspects and also the gravity of offence committed by the petitioner, this Court comes to the conclusion that if this type of petitioner is released on bail, she may try to tamper the witness and hamper the investigation. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 24/02/2022 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 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CCB TEAM - II, CHENNAI- 600 007.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL, CHENNAI.

Copy To:

THE SUB REGISTRAR, AMBATTUR, CHENNAI.

CC to M/S V.RAMANAREDDY Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.2400/2022 Date :24/02/2022 TA-03/03/2022