Karthiga v. The State Rep By Its,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twenty Seventh day of April Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Dr Justice G. JAYACHANDRAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.9612 of 2022 KARTHIGA [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP BY ITS, [ RESPONDENT ] THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, DCB, CUDDALORE POLICE STATION, CUDDALORE DISTRICT CR.NO.32 OF 2021.

For Petitioner : M/S.N.U.PRESSANNA 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/A2, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC in Crime No.32 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The petitioner herein got married to one Janakiraman on 04.12.2016. In a case connected with fraud committed by Janakiraman, this petitioner and other three accused persons, the First Information Report dated 18.01.2021 for the alleged offence between 01.08.2018 and 01.02.2020 given by one Ravi alleging cheating to the tune of Rs.94,90,000/- was registered against this petitioner as one of the accused, who has received money from the defacto complainant through her bank account.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner got separated from the first accused Janakiraman for his illegal activity and initiated divorce proceedings on 26.03.2021.

4.This Court, on overall perusal of the records and sequence of the events finds that as per the defacto complainant, the money was siphoned from him by the first accused Janakiraman and this https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

petitioner since 2018. The complaint given by Ravi against the first accused Janakiraman is not the first of this sort and there are four more cases against him since 2019. Though he and the petitioner had been cheating the public by promising appointment and seats in the medical college, at present it appears that the first accused Janakiraman and the second accused are parted away. This fact will not take away the criminal activity committed when they both were living together. Hence, this Court decline to grant anticipatory bail to this petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

-sd/- 27/04/2022 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 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, DCB, CUDDALORE POLICE STATION, CUDDALORE DISTRICT 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.N.U.PRESSANNA Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.6571 CRL OP.9612/2022 Date :27/04/2022 RVR 02/05/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/