I.Frank v. State Rep.By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Fourteenth day of December Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V. THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.22061 of 2021 I.FRANK [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP.BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH (CCB-1) VEPERY, CHENNAI-07 CRIME NO.21 OF 2021 For Petitioner : M/S.L.INFANT DINESH Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.GOKULAKRISHNAN, Additional public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 109, 120B, 420 and 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.21 of 2021 on the file of the respondent seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is A6. It is alleged that the petitioner along with other accused had approached the defacto complainant and made a representation that they have a "Rare Earth Metal" which is worth about several lakhs crore and they induce him to invest money. On believing this, the defacto complainant had entered into an agreement and invested money to the tune of Rs.24,20,00,000/-. Subsequently, the defacto complainant came to know that the above material is fake and the entire amount and the amount was not repaid further the accused persons threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences. Hence, the defacto complainant, lodged a complaint before the Law Enforcing Agency. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner did not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submits that petitioner is the friend of the main accused and he is only accompanying with A5 without benefit of any profit, hence he pray for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4 The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that many of the main accused are still absconding and the investigation is still pending. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Considering gravity of offence as well as the allegation levelled against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 14/12/2021 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, CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH (CCB-1) VEPERY, CHENNAI-07 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
+1 CC to M/S.L.INFANT DINESH Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.14726 CRL OP.22061/2021 Date :14/12/2021 JPA 20/12/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/