T.Indira v. State Through
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.24426 of 2021 T.INDIRA [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE THROUGH [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CCB-II, EDF-III, TEAM-20-A, VEPERY, CHENNAI-07.
(CR.NO.197/2019) For Petitioner : M/S.R.GANESH KUMAR Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.GOKULAKRISHNAN, 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 Sections 406, 420 and 120(b) of IPC later altered into Sections 406, 420, 468, 471 and 120 (b) of IPC, in Crime No.197 of 2019, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused persons had obtained a loan by mortgaged the property belonging to the defacto complainant. Further, the petitioner along with other accused persons had cheated and threatened the defacto complainant. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and she has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner along with other accused persons had cheated the defacto complainant more than Rs.1 Crore.. He further submitted that there is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
serious allegation made against the petitioner and the investigation is at initial stage. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Considering the fact that large amounts of money is involved and that the petitioner has cheated the defacto complainant and also taking into consideration the fact that investigation is still going on, enlarging the petitioner on anticipatory bail at this point of time, when the offence is serious in nature and there is likelihood of the petitioner indulging in activities which would be prejudicial for investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. 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, CCB-II, EDF-III, TEAM-20-A, VEPERY, CHENNAI-07.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
+1CC to M/S.R.GANESH KUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.14856 CRL OP.24426/2021 Date :15/12/2021 CSK 03/01/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/