Anbu Alias Anbalagan v. State Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twenty Second day of December Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V.THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.24700 of 2021 ANBU ALIAS ANBALAGAN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH, EDF-II, TEAM XXXVII, CHENNAI.
(CRIME NO.194/2021) For Petitioner : M/S.K.SAMIDURAI Advocate For Respondent : M/S.A.GOKULAKRISHNAN, Additional Public Prosecutor For Intervener : M/S.K.MOHANAMURALI, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Section 420 & 506(II) of IPC on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is chief news editor in Malai Murasu News Channel and he is in charge of the marketing division of the said channel. The petitioner is an advertisement agent and he worked as Manager for distribution and marketing in Malai Murasu Television from July 2015 till October 2018. He is alleged to pay the due of Rs.1,87,40,134/- to the said company and when the same was questioned by the defacto complainant, the petitioner refused to give any explanation and abused him in filthy language. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the he is an advertisement agent in the field of television channel media and the Malai Murasu daily channel has approached the
petitioner for the post of Manager in Distribution and Marketing for the said channel. From December 2016 at the request of Malai Murasu channel, the petitioner acted as an advertisement agent and attached his agency namely Vikas Advertisement and Visaka Media for commission basis. As per the agreed terms, the said channel has to pay 15% as commission to the petitioner, he has given an amount to a tune of Rs.9,00,00,000/- for business purpose till October 2018, but they did not paid the commission as agreed, hence, he has quit the dealing with the said channel and came out of the business from November 2018. Hence prays for grant of anticipatory bail.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent submitted that the petitioner is alleged to pay the due of Rs.1,87,40,134/- to the said company and when the same was questioned by the defacto complainant, the petitioner refused to give any explanation and abused him in filthy language. He further submitted that the petitioner did not appeared and has not co-operated for the enquiry. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the Intervener submitted that from the year 2015 to 2016, the petitioner has appointed as collection agent for the said company. On verifying the audit account for the past 3 1⁄2 years, the company found that the petitioner has to pay a huge amount for the Malai Murasu channel. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the conduct of the petitioner and since, this case involve a huge amount which needs a detailed investigation and if he is released on bail, he would abscond, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petition seeking anticipatory bail is dismissed. -sd/- 22/12/2021 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, CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH, EDF-II, TEAM XXXVII, CHENNAI.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
CC to M/S.K.SAMIDURAI Advocate on payment of necessary charges +1 CC to M/S.K.MOHANAMURALI, Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.15413 CRL OP.24700/2021 Date :22/12/2021 TA-05/01/2022