Madras High CourtCRL OP/22077/2024dismissed

M.Krishnaveni v. State Rep. By

2024-09-26Honourable Mrs Justice T.V.Thamilselvi4 pages

Crl.O.P.No.22077 of 2024 T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 120(B), 465, 467, 466, 471, 477A, 420 and 34 of IPC in Crime No.04 of 2024, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant and others had invested Rs.22,48,50,000/- in the FX Yogi Advisers and Consultants Private Limited/accused company. Thereafter, the petitioner along with others had cheated the defacto complainant and others and the said amount has not been repaid to the depositors. Hence the complaint.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is the mother of the first accused and she is an innocent person and she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and she has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays

to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner along with co-accused by giving false promise that the amount will be doubled, had collected amount to the tune of Rs.22,48,50,000/- from 450 depositors. After collecting the amount, the petitioner along with co-accused had not repaid the amount to the defacto complainant and others as promised and thereby cheated them. He further submitted that the petitioner herein has actively participated in the said offence. During investigation, it is found that A1 who is the son of the petitioner built a new house in Erode District in S.No.453/8 and 453/11 New Survey No.453/8A1A. He further submitted that amount was not recovered from the accused so far. Hence, he vehemently opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the above submission made by the learned

Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent and also considering the fact that the investigation is not yet completed, at this stage, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 26.09.2024 mfa T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

mfa Crl.O.P.No.22077 of 2024 26.09.2024