Mohan v. State Represented By The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Fifteenth day of December Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V.THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.23942 of 2021 MOHAN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REPRESENTED BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, Q BRANCH CID, CHENNAI.
(CRIME NO.01/2021) For Petitioner : M. ARUN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.GOKULAKRISHNAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 31.10.2021 for the offences under Sections 12(1b), 12(1A) (a) of Passport Act, 1967, Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 of IPC and Sections 14(a) Foreigners (Amendment) Act, 2004, in Crime No.01 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner entered into a conspiracy along with other accused in order to siphon off the huge money to the tune of Rs.42.28 Crores lying in the dormant account maintained in the Indian overseas Bank, Fort Mumbai Branch by one Hamida A Lalljee and other, in a dishonest and fraudulent manner with an ulterior motive to utilize the fund for furthering the activities of the LTTE in India, which is a banned organisation by the Government of India. Further, they all have acted as per the direction of one Umakanthan, Ex-LTTE who is at Denmark. 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 committed by the other accused and he is a poor man who does not know the real facts and he has been suffering incarceration for 45 days from 31.10.2021. Hence, he would pray for grant of bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would raise strong objection stating that the petitioner also colluded with the other accused to create the forged documents and that the case needs a detailed investigation.
5.On seeing the nature of allegations in the FIR and considering the submission made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the case needs a detailed investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
-sd/- 15/12/2021 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, Q BRANCH CID, CHENNAI.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
3 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL.
CC to M. ARUN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.23942/2021 Date :15/12/2021 CSK 03/01/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/