D.Saravanan v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Sixteenth day of April Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.15045 of 2020 1 D.SARAVANAN [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED ] 2 P.K.BAKKIYA RAJ Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CBCID, CUDDALORE DISTRICT.

(CR.NO.2 OF 2020) For Petitioner : M/S. K.GANDHI KUMAR Advocate For Respondent : M/S.S.KARTHIKEYAN, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 468, 471, 471(A), 409, 420 read with under Section 43, 66(A) of the Information Technology Act 2000 in Crime No.2 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the Project Manager/Joint Director of Agriculture, Cuddalore gave a complaint before the respondent police that during the year 2018, to develop the Agriculture, the Central Governemnt intoduce a scheme viz., KISAN. Under the said scheme, Rs.6,000/- in a three installments was given to the eligible Agriculturist. In this circumstances, the official of the Agriculture Department misappropriated a huge sum to distribute the money to in-eligible candidates.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case and prayed for grant of anticipatory bail. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners are technical manager in the agricultural department. The petitioners had misappropriated nearly Rs.1,68,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore and Sixty Eight Lakhs only) and investigation is still pending. Therefore, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also of the fact that the case is in the initial stage of the investigation and that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is essential, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 16/04/2021 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, CBCID, CUDDALORE DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+1 CC to M/S. K.GANDHI KUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.No.4923 CRL OP.15045/2020 Date :16/04/2021 cs 16/06/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/