P.Santhosh v. State Rep By

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 120(B), 406, 420 of IPC & Section 5 of TNPID Act 1997 in Crime.No.1 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that one K.Murugan has lodged a complaint with EOW-II on 13.04.2022 he has invested Rs.16,00,000/- in three companies namely 1.Alpha FX Markets Ltd., 2. Alpha Education and 3.Alpha Investment Corporation and they did not returned the deposit amounts of Rs.16,00,000/- to the defacto complainant. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is arrayed as A8 in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner was employed in the first accused company as Assistant Manager other than being an employee there, he has no role in the collection of amounts and cheating and he is not a beneficiary of the transactions. He

would further submit that similarly placed accused/A6 & A7 has been arrested and enlarged by the Court. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the petitioner is an employee of A1 company and he was canvassed and received deposits from various persons. He further submitted that the prosecution has received 13 complaints from various persons. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and that there is possibility of tampering the witnesses, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petition seeking anticipatory bail is dismissed.

12.12.2022 dpq

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

dpq 12.12.2022