Nandhini Jaganathan v. The State Represented By

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J., The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC, in Crime No.27 of 2023, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and one Madhavan had given money to one Dutta of Bhopal who promised them to give Government employment. Later she learnt that she was cheated by that person and lodged complaint against her before the District Cirme Branch, Trichy. Thereafter, Madhavan had been summoned by the Central Crime Branch, Tiruppur for similar heist happened in Tiruppur. Now Madhavan is insisting and threatening the petitioner that she should accompany him for the enquiry otherwise he would name her as an accomplice to the police authorities and get her arrested. Hence, the case. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had never been involved in any incident and has no role to play 1/3

in the alleged offence. He further submits that the petitioner is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submits that the petitioner had introduced the defacto complainant to A1 and notice has been served for enquiry. He further submitted that a detailed investigation is required in this case. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration of the above facts and circumstances and also the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) that this case needs a detailed investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 24.06.2024 dpq 2/3

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J., dpq 24.06.2024 3/3