M.Dhavamani v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Thirteenth day of May Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice S. KANNAMMAL CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.9056 of 2021 M.DHAVAMANI [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH, TIRUPPUR CITY.

CRIME NO.01/2021.

For Petitioner : M/S.SARAVANAN P. Advocate For Respondent : M/S.T.SHUNMUGARAJESWARAN, 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 offences under Sections 3 and 4 of Prize Chit & Money Cir.Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 and Section 76(1) The Chit Funds Act, 1982 and Section 420 of IPC, in Crime No.01 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and her husband are running a chit fund company in the name and style of "Sri Veera Chinnammal Chit Funds and they induced the de-facto complainant that if he invest in the chit he would get huge amount. Believing the words of the petitioner's husband, the de-facto complainant had invested huge amount in the chit. Thereafter, they failed to return the chit amount and thereby, cheated him to the tune of Rs.3,20,000/-.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution and she has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that A1 was already arrested and released on bail. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner and her husband are running a chit company and on the false promise of repaying huge amount, they collected a sum of Rs.1,57,00,000/- from various investors including the de-facto complainant and thereafter, failed to repay the chit amount. He would further submit that investigation is still pending. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the fact that huge amount was involved in this case and investigation is yet to be completed, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

-sd/- 13/05/2021 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, CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH, TIRUPPUR CITY.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.SARAVANAN P. Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.9056/2021 Date :13/05/2021 TA-30/06/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/