Ayyappan v. State Represented By Its

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 IPC in Crime No.11 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.It is the case of the prosecution that the defacto complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioner herein stating that in January 2021 all the accused came to the defacto complainant's home, convinced the father of the defacto complainant with seat coated words and demanded Rs.13,00,000/- to secure a Government Job. By trusting the same, the defacto complainant transferred Rs.12,00,000/- from his State Bank Accoutn No.11185858750 to the petitioner account maintained in Indian Overseas, Katumaavadi Branch bearing Account No.363301000004311 on various dates from 03.02.2021 to 18.03.2021. After the demise of the defacto complainant's father all the accused approached the defacto complainant and demanded a sum of Rs.8,25,000/- to the petitioner. Believing the words of the accused the defacto complainant transferred the said amount. Percontra the accused denied the same. Hence the complaint. 1/4

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that he has been falsely implicated in this case. As such the petitioner has nothing to do with the complaint against him and the money transferred from the defacto complainant account. He is ready to abide by the conditions stipulated by this Court for granting of anticipatory bail. He will obey the same without fail and he will cooperate with the investigation. Hence he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner stating that Rs.12,00,000/- has been received by way of cash and the accused cheated the defacto complainant totally to the tune of Rs.20,00,000/- along with accused and this is the third anticipatory bail application filed before this Court. No recovery has been made. 5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent and perused the entire materials available on record.

6.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the 2/4

submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) and considering the gravity of the offence and also taking note of the fact that the case is at initial stage and it needs detailed investigation. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 28.06.2024 ah 3/4

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

ah 28.06.2024 4/4