K.Ravikumar v. The State Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Twenty Fifth day of March Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Dr Justice G. JAYACHANDRAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.6866 of 2022 K.RAVIKUMAR [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CCB-II, CHENNAI.
(CRIME NO.8 OF 2022) For Petitioner : M/S.K.GOWTHAMAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.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 at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under sections 406, 420, 465, 468 and 120B of IPC in Crime No.8 of 2022 seeks anticipatory bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner promising the defacto complainant to get a Post in the Food Corporation of India. According to the complaint, the defacto complainant viz., Sasi kumar, has given a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- to the petitioner/second accused for getting job and subsequently issued fake appointment order and thereby, cheated the defacto complainant.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent states that five similar complaints have been received against the petitioner after receiving the present complaint and totally the accused had cheated a sum of Rs.58,00,000/- from various persons. The petitioner before this Court is arrayed as A2 who was acted as an agent for A1.
5. The counter filed by the respondent police discloses MOP and therefore, the petition for anticipatory bail is to be dismissed.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in a connected matter, the petitioner was already arrested and released on bail. Therefore, in this case, he is entitled for anticipatory bail.
7. This Court has to blame the counsel himself that the earlier bail was granted to this petitioner and he is continuing to indulge this kind of fraudulent activities and without any shame, makes a submission that the petitioner is entitled for anticipatory bail. Not subjecting with that this Court is also disgusted with the manner in which the respondent police permitting the persons like the defacto complainant to canvas against the accused persons after they themselves being prevailing to the crime of securing job in Government Departments and Government undertakings. While discussing the petition for anticipatory bail, directing the respondent police to secure the defacto complainant and prosecuting for abetting the other accused in case of securing Government Job illegally.
8. In view of the same, this Anticipatory Bail Petition stands dismissed and directs the respondent police to secure the defacto complainant and take action against him in accordance with law. -sd/- 25/03/2022 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, CCB-II, CHENNAI.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
CC to M/S.K.GOWTHAMAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.6866/2022 Date :25/03/2022 JPA 05/04/2022