E.G.Dhanraj v. The State By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the First day of December Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V. THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.23029 of 2021 E.G.DHANRAJ [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION, CITY SPECIAL UNIT III, ALANDUR, CHENNAI - 600 016.

CRIME NO.7 OF 2021 For Petitioner : M/S.M.MOHAMED RIYAZ Advocate For Respondent : MR.N.S.SUGANTHAN, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) 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 Section 7(b) of Prevention of Corruption Act (Amendment Act) 2018, in Crime No.7 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is working as a Executive Officer, Sriperumbudur Town Panchayat. Further, the petitioner along with A2 had demanded a sum of Rs.50,000/- for this petitioner and Rs.10,000/- for A2 as bribe amount from the defacto complainant for sanctioning the layout belonging to the defacto complainant and the trap was conducted, the second accused was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is working as a Executive Officer, Sriperumbudur Town Panchayat, he was in 34 years

service without any enquiry, a false case has been foisted. He also further submitted that on 17.11.2021, he was in Kancheepuram Collectorate for the meeting conducted by the State Election Commissioner. He further submitted that the petitioner had participated the investigation which was conducted by the respondent police and the house search was also conducted on 17.11.2021 and the petitioner had co-operate for the same. He further submitted that the petitioner is not present in the scene of occurrence and no recovery was made from this petitioner and there is no previous case pending against the petitioner. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the petitioner is working as a Executive Officer, Sriperumbudur Town Panchayat. Further, the petitioner along with A2 had demanded a sum of Rs.50,000/- for this petitioner and Rs.10,000/- for A2 as bribe amount from the defacto complainant for sanctioning the layout belonging to the defacto complainant and the trap was conducted, He also further submitted that the second accused was arrested and the investigation is at initial stage. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the investigation is at initial stage and the co-accused had already been arrested and remanded to judicial custody, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 01/12/2021 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, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION, CITY SPECIAL UNIT III, ALANDUR, CHENNAI - 600 016.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+1 CC to M/S.M.MOHAMED RIYAZ Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.13940 CRL OP.23029/2021 Date :01/12/2021 JPA 07/12/2021