Pushpa v. State Rep 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.3732 of 2022 1 PUSHPA [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED ] 2 RAJARAM Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CUDDALORE EOW-II POLICE STATION, CUDDALORE DISTRICT.
CRIME NO. 04/2021 For Petitioner : M/S A.SATHISHKUMAR Advocate For Respondent : M/S.S.SANTHOSH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Section 420 of I.P.C. r/w. 4(1) & 76 (1) of The Chit Funds Act, 1982 in Crime No.04 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners are running an Auction Chits at their house with friends, relatives and neighbours. The defacto complainant joined the auction chit of Rs.5,00,000/- on 05.12.2019 for a monthly payment of Rs.25,000/-. Till June, 2020, the defacto complainant has paid a sum of Rs.1,04,000/- towards chit amount and on 29.11.2018, the defacto complainant has given a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as hand loan to the petitioners. For the total due amount of Rs.4,04,000/-, the first petitioner has executed a promissory note only for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- on 20.01.2021. It is further alleged that these
petitioners also cheated other participants of the chit. When the defacto complainant approached the house of the petitioners, the same was locked and later, the defacto complainant came to know that the petitioners were absconded. Therefore, based on the complaint made by the defacto complainant, the Law Enforcing Agency has registered a case against these petitioners for the above said crime.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are an innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioners are willing to deposit the alleged cheated amount. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police raised an objection stating that the investigation is still pending. He would further submit that after registering the present case, four other public approached the respondent police and lodged a complaint against these petitioners saying that they are also cheated by the petitioners.
5. The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for either sides are considered.
6. Though the petitioners are willing to deposit the entire misappropriated amount, they raised an objection for disbursing the same to the defacto complainant. However, as of now, four more complaints are received by the respondent police, on which, no action has been initiated. Hence, if this type of petition is granted with anticipatory bail, they may try to tamper the witness and hamper the investigation. Hence, this 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 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CUDDALORE EOW-II POLICE STATION, CUDDALORE DISTRICT.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
CC to M/S A.SATHISHKUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.3732/2022 Date :24/02/2022 RW 03/03/2022