Nithya v. State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02.09.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.12344 of 2020 and Crl.M.P No.5140 of 2020

1. Nithya

2. G.Subramaniyan

3. S.Kannambal .. Petitioner Vs.

State rep. by The Inspector of Police CCB, Salem City Police Station Salem District.

(Cr.No.10 of 2020) .. Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.10 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Balachandran For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor For Intervenor : Mr. R.Marudhachalamurthy

O R D E R

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 420 and 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.10 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners and prime accused and were doing on-line trading business in the name of Ocean Rich and on the false promise of giving Rs.1,666/- per day for Rs.1,00,000/-, the petitioners have collected money to the tune of Rs.7,77,50,000/- from the defacto complainant, other investors and relatives through bank transaction. Thereafter, they cheated the investors. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner are innocents and they have been falsely implicated in this case since they happen to be the relatives of the first accused.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioners by floating fancy schemes on the inducement that they will repay Rs.1,666/- per day for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- invested and thereby, several gullible victims have deposited an amount of Rs.7,77,50,000/- and thereafter, the accused cheated the innocent and gullible victims. He would further submit that A1 was arrested and the investigation is in initial stage and that the petitioners are absconding.

5. The learned counsel for the intervenor would submit that the accused, by floating fancy schemes on the inducement of Rs.1,666/- will be returned per day, for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- invested and induced several victims. Based on which, the investors have deposited to the tune of Rs.7,77,50,000/- and thereafter, the accused have cheated them.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and huge amounts have been cheated by the petitioners and the investigation is in initial stage, this Court is inclined is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is ordered. -sd/- 02/09/2020 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, SALEM CITY POLICE STATION, SALEM DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+1 CC to M/S.R,MARUDHACHALAMURTHY Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.No.6115 CRL OP.12344/2020 & CRL.MP.5140/2020 Date :02/09/2020 cs 11/09/2020