Nagaraj A v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Third day of December Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V.THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.22768 of 2021 NAGARAJ A [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CYBER CRIME CELL, CB CID, CHENNAI.

(CRIME NO.6/2020) For Petitioner : M/S.RAJPUROHIT LAW HOUSE Advocate For Respondent : MR.N.S.SUGANTHAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- (The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.10.2021 for the offences under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 of I.P.C r/w. Section 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, in Crime No.6 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 21.09.2020, the de facto complainant received a call from an unknown person who introduced himself that he is working in Snapdeal and has stated that the defacto complainant has won Rs.12,80,000/- in Snapdeal lucky draw contest and informed that to claim the prize money, the defacto complainant should deposit certain amount as processing fee. As per his instruction, the de facto complainant deposited a sum of Rs.14,78,680/- in various bank accounts and even after transferring the amount, the defacto complainant did not receive any prize amount. Hence, the complaint.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is no way connected with the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case based on the confession statement recorded from other accused. He would further submit that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration for more than 35 days from 22.10.2021 and he is ready to abide any stringent condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he would pray for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would raise strong objection stating that the petitioner is arrayed as A5 and he has withdrawn the money from the account of A4 in which, the defacto complainant deposited the said amount. Hence, the case needs a detailed enquiry.

5. It is seen that the petitioner has withdrawn money from the account which is not belongs to him and that the case needs a detailed investigation. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

-sd/- 03/12/2021 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, CYBER CRIME CELL, CB CID, CHENNAI.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL JAIL, PUZHAL, CHENNAI.

CC to M/S.RAJPUROHIT LAW HOUSE Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.22768/2021 Date :03/12/2021 TA-27/12/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/