Shrwan Singh v. The State Represented By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Third day of December Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V. THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.25302 of 2021 SHRWAN SINGH [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CCD-I, VEPERY, CHENNAI.

CRIME NO.46 OF 2021.

For Petitioner : M/S.MANO, Advocate for M/S.PRAVEEN PUROHIT, Advocate For Respondent : MR.N.S.SUGANTHAN, 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 15.12.2021 for the offences under Sections 419, 420 of IPC and 66C and 66D of the information Technology Act in in crime No.46 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused created multiple fake domain website in the name of the Chennai based Madras Tours and Travels, offering international tour package to travellers and collected the amount from people into unknown bank accounts and caused wrongful loss to the defacto complainant. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner was no way connected in this case and he was falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that petitioner is the friend of A1, he only transferred the amount from his account to the others, he was not gained anything from this transaction and there is no nexus between the petitioner and the crime committed by the other accused. He was suffering incarceration for more than 35 days from 17.11.2021. He would pray for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) raised objection stating that the fraudsters had given four different bank accounts and the mobile number provided in the website. He further submits that A1 is still absconding, A2 and A3 were arrested. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submissions made by both counsel, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 23/12/2021 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, CCD-I, VEPERY, CHENNAI.

2 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL JAIL, PUZHAL.

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.PRAVEEN PUROHIT Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.25302/2021 Date :23/12/2021 JPA 04/01/2022