S.Gopinath v. Inspector Of Police

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.

The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in Crime No.2 of 2019 registered under Sections 406, 420, 120(B), 506(i) IPC and Section 5 of TNPID Act, 1997.

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing on behalf of the respondent. 3.The original complaint given on 27.4.2023. There was yet another complaint in Crime No.53 of 2018, registered by the District Crime Branch, Kancheepuram under Section 420 IPC, on a complaint given by one Rameshwari. All the complaints have been clubbed with the respondent. It is the case of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner's name is not found in any of the complaint and that the petitioner is also a victim of the entire scheme of affairs.

4.The respondents were directed to file a status report and in the status report, it had been stated that there were totally 11 accused and that the 1/4

petitioner has been arrayed as A9. It had been stated that as on date, the respondents had received 109 petitions from various individuals and the total amount involved is Rs.3,40,71,119/-. A3 had been arrested, but had been released on bail since the final report had not been filed. A6 had also been arrested. It had also been stated that the anticipatory bail applications of A11 had been dismissed on 01.09.2023 and the anticipatory bail application of A7 had also been dismissed on 13.09.2023. It was also stated that during the course of investigation it had been very specifically found that the petitioner had collected the amount from Joyal Paulraj through Rohit Infant Raj and the amount was of a sum of Rs.4,10,000/- and the amount was split up between Renaut Nivetha/A6 and to Anthony Jefrey/A7. 5.

It is the very specific of the respondent that the petitioner had received commission for the said amounts collected from Joyal Paulraj. It is stated that there was yet another individual from whom the petitioner has similarly collected and investigation will have to be made as to the name of that particular person.

increasing, even though, the learned counsel states that the petitioner is a victim but has been shown as A9, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail, petition stands dismissed.

6.Accordingly, the anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed. 06.11.2023 kp 3/4

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.

kp 06.11.2023 4/4