Poongothai v. State Rep By

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 420 IPC, in Crime No.211 of 2022, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 11.02.2017 to 19.10.2021, the petitioners were conducted chit business under the name and style of KPK and the defacto complainant also one of the subscriber in the above said chit. After receiving the monthly chit amount, the petitioners refused to settle the chit amount for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that one of the accused namely Vanaroja had received the said amount from the defacto complainant and the petitioners have not received any amount. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. Therefore, he prays to grant anticipatory

bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted the petitioners doing chit fund business and they received a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- from the defacto complainant as monthly chit amount and involved in cheating. He further submitted that the petitioners are having three previous cases similar in nature. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of the fact that the petitioners having three previous cases, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, the criminal original petition is dismissed. 25.08.2022 ata G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

ata 25.08.2022