Madras High CourtCRL OP/14708/2021dismissed

Perumal v. The State Rep By

2021-08-19Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Nineteenth day of August Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.14708 of 2021 PERUMAL [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, ARIYALUR.

(CRIME NO. 1/2021) For Petitioner : M/S.S.VENKATESH Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.GOPINATH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervenor : MR.MAHENDIRA NAIDU Advocate PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested on 14.07.2021 and remanded to judicial custody for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420, 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.1 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the defacto complainant and another one person Raju are partners in running canteen which is situated in Ramco Cement Factory. Further, the petitioner had maintained all the bank transactions. In this stage, this petitioner has cheating more than Rs.9,00,000/ by way of transfer the amount from the defacto complainant account to the petitioner account. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he is no way connected with the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner has been in jail from 14.07.2021. Hence he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the investigation is at initial stage. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5. The learned counsel for the defacto complainant/intervenor submitted that the petitioner had cheated the defacto complainant and threatened him. Hence, he strongly opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the petitioner had involved in very serious offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 19/08/2021 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, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, ARIYALUR.

2 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL JAIL, TIRUCHY.

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.S.VENKATESH Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.14708/2021 Date :19/08/2021 CSK 14/09/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/