Mohammed Azaruddin @ Kadher Mohideen Iqbal v. Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Eighteenth day of May Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.11353 of 2022 MOHAMMED AZARUDDIN @ KADHER [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] INSPECTOR OF POLICE CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH-1, CHENNAI.

CR.NO. 140 OF 2021.

For Petitioner : M/S.M.GOVINDARAJU Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.DAMODARAN, Additional Public Prosecutor 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 409, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 IPC in Crime No.140 of 2021 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.There are totally 5 accused in this case and the petitioner is arrayed as A2. The case of the prosecution is that, A1 is working as a Senior Associates Manager in the Hong Kong and Shangai Banking Corporation Limited. The petitioner, along with other accused, have conspired and misappropriated Rs.1,51,77,752/- by misusing the KYC documents by making fabricated documents in the name of non-existing company. Hence the complaint.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that a false case has been foisted as against the petitioner and hence he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent Police submitted that the petitioner is arrayed as A2 in this case and A2 to A4 have themselves posed as HR Manager in a private concern and created false documents and obtained Credit Cards through A1, thereby, they have cheated the defacto complainant Bank to the tune of Rs.1,51,77,752/-. That apart, they have also obtained loan in the name of fictitious persons and failed to repay the same. They borrowed various loans through the Credit Cards, which were obtained in the name of fictitious persons and failed to return the said amount and hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and as the petitioner has committed very heinous offences, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required and hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 18/05/2022 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 INSPECTOR OF POLICE CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH-1, CHENNAI. CR.NO. 140 OF 2021.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.M.GOVINDARAJU Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.11353/2022 Date :18/05/2022 SP(20/05/2022) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/