P.Ashok Kumar v. The State By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Thirteenth day of June Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.13511 of 2022 P.ASHOK KUMAR [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE BY [ RESPONDENT ] INSPECTOR OF POLICE, HASTHAMPATTI POLICE STATION, SALEM DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO.342/2021) For Petitioner : M/S.M.KARTHIK Advocate For Respondent : M/S. 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 punishable under Sections 406, 420, 463, 464,465, 471 & 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.342 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that totally there are three accused and the petitioner is arrayed as A2. The petitioner along with other accused A1, cheated the defacto complainant, to get a job in Central Food Corporation, for a tune of Rs.2,48,00,000/-. Thereafter, the petitioner neither get a job nor returned the money. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and no way connected with the alleged offence. He further submittted that A3 only received the money from the petitioner and this petitioner received a sum of Rs.65,00,000/- and the same was returned to the defacto complainant. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that there are totally 3 accused and the petitioner herein is A2. The petitioner along with other accused to get a job in Central Food Corporation in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

the year 2018 and believing the words, the defacto complainant had spent a sum of Rs.2,48,00,000/-. Hence he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much necessary in this case. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 13/06/2022 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, HASTHAMPATTI POLICE STATION, SALEM DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.M.KARTHIK Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.13511/2022 Date :13/06/2022 RVR 22/06/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/