Sathyam @ Kumar, Sathyam, v. The State Rep. By Its

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Sixteenth day of July Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P. N. PRAKASH CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.9263 of 2018 IN CRL OP.13803/2017 SATHYAM @ KUMAR, SATHYAM, [ PETITIONER ] Vs THE STATE REP. BY ITS [ RESPONDENT ] INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH, CHENNAI. CR.NO.156/2017 Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein the High Court will be pleased to modify the order passed in Crl.O.P.No. 13803 of 2017, dated 20.07.2017 comply the same and pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court.

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.K.MOHANAMURALI, Advocate for the petitioner and of Ms.KRITIKA KAMAL.P. Government Advocate (Crl.Side) on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:- The petitioner was granted anticipatory bail by this Court on 20.07.2017 in Crl.OP.No.13803 of 2017, on condition that he should appear before the XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai within a period of fifteen days and execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- with two sureties and also to deposit a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Only).

2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking modification of the condition relating to the deposit amount of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Only).

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent-State.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was not involved in the offence, but it was A1, who had collected money from various students and had cheated them. He further submitted that A1 was released on regular bail without any condition.

5. However, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that the petitioner has been implicated by A1 in his confession statement and therefore, the petitioner cannot say that he is innocent.

6. It is seen that A1 was arrested and released on regular bail, whereas, the petitioner has been granted pre-arrest bail. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to modify the condition relating to the deposit amount of Rs.3,00,000/-. However, two weeks time is extended from the date of receipt of a copy of this order for the petitioner to surrender and furnish sureties in compliance with the earlier order dated 20.07.2017 made in Crl.OP.No.13803 of 2017. Rest of the conditions passed by this Court shall remain the same.

With the above direction, this petition is ordered, accordingly. -sd/- 16/07/2018 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 METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, NO.XI, SAIDAPET, CHENNAI.

2 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI.

[FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

4 THE STATE REP. BY ITS INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH, CHENNAI.

+1 C.C. to M/S.K.MOHANAMURALI Advocate on payment of necessary charges-Sr.13031 Order in CRL MP.9263/2018 in CRL OP.13803/2017 Date :16/07/2018 From 7.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the BAIL/Anti.BAIL Orders in this format ths : 19.07.2018