K.Chennakrishnan v. The State Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Seventeenth day of August Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.14517 of 2021 K.CHENNAKRISHNAN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION MUNICIPAL BUILDING, NEAR ARMED RESERVE POLICE, KOMARASAMYPATTI, SALEM-7 CRIME NO.FIR/02/AC/2020 For Petitioner : M/S.C.S.ASSOCIATES Advocate For Respondent : MR.C.E.PRATAP, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- (The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 13(2) r/w 13(1)(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, in Cr.No.FIR/02/AC/2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, during the check period from 01.01.2011 to 31.08.2017, is alleged to have been found in possession Rs.98,31,630/-, which amount is disproportionate to his known sources of income. Thereby, the petitioner had committed the offence of criminal misconduct by intentionally enriching himself illicitly during the tenure of his office.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submits that the petitioner continuously involved in the labour activities and is posted as General Secretary in Anna Labour Union in Salem District. Hence, lots of rivalries developed and the case came to be registered. He further submits that the allegation pertains to acquisition of assets and during investigation, no material evidence was found in the custody of the petitioner, hence arrest is not necessary and prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that earlier, the Bank locker of the petitioner was seized, however, he threatened the bank officials, who co-operated for investigation and further submits that this is petitioner's second application and the petitioner's earlier application was dismissed by this Court on 02.08.2021 in Crl.O.P.No.12780 of 2021 on the ground that the petitioner threatened the Bank Officials who shared information to the law enforcing agency.
5. Considering the allegation levelled as against the petitioner and and the fact that he threatened the bank officials who shared information to the law enforcing agency and also the fact that after the dismissal of the earlier application, there is no change of circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 17/08/2021 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, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION MUNICIPAL BUILDING, NEAR ARMED RESERVE POLICE, KOMARASAMYPATTI, SALEM-7
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
+1 CC to M/S.C.S.ASSOCIATES Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.8751 CRL OP.14517/2021 Date :17/08/2021 JPA 23/09/2021