Gowtham Ganesh v. The State Represented By Its
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14-07-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN
1. Gowtham Ganesh
2. J.Karthika Petitioners Vs The State represented by its Inspector of Police, M1 Madhavaram Police Station, Chennai District. Crime No.77 of 2024 Respondent PRAYER This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioners on Anticipatory Bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.77 of 2024 pending investigation on the file of the respondent. For Petitioners:
Mr.M.Rajinikanth For Respondent(s):
Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.side)
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 406 & 420 IPC, in Crime
No.77 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners had alleged to have cheated the defacto complainant to the tune of Rs.15 Lakhs by way of doing online trading business. Hence, the complaint. 3.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He would submit that it is the case of money dispute and it has been falsely projected as a case of cheating. Therefore, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4.
Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioners with their sweet coated words had received an amount of Rs.15 Lakhs from the defacto complainant for running online trading business and thereby, cheated him. He also stated that investigation is pending and if the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail at this
stage, there will be possibility of abscondance and will hamper the investigation. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the allegation level against the petitioners and the objection raised by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side), this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition seeking anticipatory bail is dismissed.
14-07-2025 gbi Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes
To 1.The State represented by its Inspector of Police, M1 Madhavaram Police Station, Chennai District. Crime No.77 of 2024.
2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN J.
gbi CRL OP No. 15777 of 14-07-2025