Fathimamubeena @ Mubeena v. The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 27.05.2021

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Crl.O.P.No.9409 of 2021 Fathimamubeena @ Mubeena ... Petitioner Vs.

State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Cuddalore.

Crime No.10 of 2020 ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.10 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr. A.Tamilvanan For Respondent : Mr.A.Damodaran Government Advocate(Crl side)

O R D E R

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294 (b), 420 and 406 of Indian Penal Code in Crime No.10 of 2020, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that defacto complainant lent a sum of Rs.47,50,000/- to the first accused who is the husband of the petitioner and the first accused assured him that he would include him as partner in the business. But the first accused failed to do so. When the defacto complainant demanded his amount, the first accused abused him with filthy language and threatened with dire consequences. Hence the complaint. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and she has nothing to do with the business of her husband/A1 and she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and she has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

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

4.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent submitted that, after filing of the FIR, they have received nearly 15 complaints against A1 and this petitioner. As per the F.I.R report, cheated amount comes around Rs.47,00,000/-.

Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.Considering the fact that many complaints have been received subsequent to the FIR against the petitioner and the gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

-sd/- 27/05/2021 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, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, CUDDALORE.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.A.TAMILVANAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.9409/2021 Date :27/05/2021 MK:05/07/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/