T.V.Prasad v. State Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Sixteenth day of December Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V. THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.24350 of 2021 T.V.PRASAD [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PS R-4 SOUNDARAPANDANAR ANGAD (PONDY BAZAAR), T.NAGAR, CHENNAI CRIME NO.443 OF 2021 For Petitioner : M/S C.KASIRAJAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.GOKULAKRISHNAN, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.11.2021 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 406, 420, 506(1) of IPC, in Crime No.443 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant in order to contest the election in Arani Constituency, approached the petitioner for arrangement of MLA seat. Further, the petitioner had received a sum of Rs.50 Lakhs from the defacto complainant. Thereafter, the petitioner neither secured MLA seat nor returned the money, Hence the complaint.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/A2 would submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the the petitioner was earlier granted anticipatory bail in Crl.O.P.No.13308 of 2021 with a condition to deposit a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- but, the petitioner had not given any consent to deposit the said amount and thereby, he was unable to comply with the condition and subsequently, the petitioner was arrested and that he has been suffering incarceration for more than 45 days from 19.11.2021. Hence, he would pray for grant of bail to the petitioner.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
4. Mrs.Anuradha, appearing for the intervenor would submit that the petitioner along with other accused by giving a false promise of getting a MLA seat in Arani Constituency had demanded of sum of one crore for which the defacto complainant has given a sum of Rs.50 lakhs as advance. But the petitioner neither secured MLA seat nor returned the money. Hence, she opposed for grant of bail.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would raise objection stating that the petitioner along with other accused under the guise of getting MLA seat in Arani Constituency has received a sum of Rs.50 lakhs from the defacto complainant and thereafter, they neither secured MLA seat nor returned the money. 6.The nature of allegation needs a detailed investigation and hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly this criminal original petitioner is dismissed. -sd/- 16/12/2021 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 OFFICER INCHARGE, CHENGALPATTU SUB JAIL, CHENGALPATTU 2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PS R-4 SOUNDARAPANDANAR ANGAD (PONDY BAZAAR), T.NAGAR, CHENNAI 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
CC to M/S C.KASIRAJAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.24350/2021 Date :16/12/2021 RVR 20/12/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/