T.Thiyagu v. The State Rep By

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in Crime No.267 of 2023 registered by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC.

2. Today, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. There has been no representation even on an earlier occasion on 23.11.2023 and 14.12.2023 and 29.01.2024. On 09.10.2023, this Court has observed that the petitioner should provide some security, but unfortunately, there has been no compliance.

3. It is the case of the prosecution that this petitioner had taken loan from the defacto complainant on the strength of providing a JCB Vehicle. Later, a finance company claiming that the JCB vehicle had been wrongly provided as security by the petitioner had taken possession of the said JCB vehicle. The defacto complainant had thus lost his money of Rs.22,00,000/- and also did not get possession of the JCB Vehicle.

4. In view of the fact that there is no representation again and 1/3

taking into consideration the facts of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition seeking anticipatory bail stands dismissed.

Vv 13.02.2024 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

2/3

Vv 13.02.2024 3/3