Vijayalakshmi v. The State Rep By

Crl.O.P.No.26437 of 2022 Crl.O.P.No.26437 of 2022 T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC in Crime No.190 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner's husband was running a jewellery manufacturing unit and he collected 3306 grams of gold from the defacto complainant by promising that he will make it as jewels and return the same to the defacto complainant. However, the petitioner's husband has not return, thereby cheated the defacto complainant. Hence, the complaint. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and she is no way connected with the alleged offence. He would further submit that it is a case and a case in counter.

Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that there are totally four accused in this case. He would also submit that the petitioner's husband/A1 had confessed that he had handed over portion of gold jewels to his sister and his family members. The respondent has also recovered 182 grams of gold from A1 and portion of gold is with the other accused. Hence, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.

Crl.O.P.No.26437 of 2022 he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

sp 5.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that 700 grams of gold is involved in this case, as of now, small quantity of the gold alone recovered and the remaining gold is under the custody of other accused, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 19.12.2022 sp Crl.O.P.No.26437 of 2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis