Indragandhi v. Inspector Of Police
Crl.O.P.No.24564 of 2023, Crl.O.P.Nos.2594 and 3833 of 2024 T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
The petitioners in Crl.O.P.Nos.24564 of 2023, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Section 120B, 406, 420 of IPC and the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.2594 of 2024, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Section 120B, 406, 420 of IPC and the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No. 3833 of 2024, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Section 406 and 420 of IPC in Crime No.33 of 2023, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.
2.
The case of the prosecution is that on 09.08.2023, the defacto complainant namely Bhuvanammal Subramaniam, Manager of Sky Institute, Kuniyamuthoor, Coimbatore had lodged a complaint against the petitioners, who arrayed as A1 and A3 in Crl.O.P.No.24564 of 2023, A2 in Crl.O.P.No.2594 of 24 and A4 in Crl.O.P.No.3833 of 2024 in Crime No.33 of 2023, jointly cheated the defacto complainant by the way of false promises that accused persons are going to start a company all over India namely SEGDC (Society of E-Governance Digitization Data Centre) and they need many workers for the said company, for which they are going to 1/6
conduct interview and they need help from the Sky institute and received a sum of Rs.2,18,25,000/- from 18 persons for offering Central Government job and failed to give the job and repay the amount. Hence the case was registered against the petitioners.
3.
The learned counsels appearing for the petitioners submits that this case was registered during the pendency of the Crl.O.P.No.15289 of 2023, which was filed by the petitioners in seeking Anticipatory Bail from this Hon'ble Court with a view to frame a false case against the petitioners and the respondent herein has acted in one side manner and infavour of the real accused person, who is the defacto complainant. They also further submitted that the petitioners have given their clear statement before the respondent along with supporting documentary evidence and established that the liability towards the defacto complainant is not beyond Rs.55,00,000/- and assured that they were ready and willing to settle their part of amount in the due course of time, which was not accepted by the respondent police, hence this case was registered with an ulterior intention to harass the petitioners and further submitted that the petitioners are innocents and have not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant. Therefore, they prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the 2/6
petitioners.
4.
The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners, by stating that the petitioners have received a sum of Rs.2,18,25,000/- from the defacto complainant by way of making false promise to fetch Central Government jobs for 18 persons and also cheated by way of conducting interview and issuing fake Offer letters to the said persons. He further submitted that the petitioners have cheated the defacto complainant and refused to return back the money and also threatened the defacto complainant.
5.
Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners herein by way of making false promise have collected a total sum of Rs.2,18,25,000/- from 18 victims through the defacto complainant, promising them to arrange a Central Government Job in SEGDC (Society of E-Governance Digitization Data Center) and also conducted a fake interview at New Delhi for the 18 victims on 18.10.2023 and issued fake Selection Orders. Thereafter, the petitioners could not be contacted by the defacto complainant and then only the defacto complainant came to know that she 3/6
has been cheated by the petitioners and subsequently, the petitioners have also vacated their residing premises in Chennai and also refused to settle the money received by them. From the records, it is found that the application was filed in the year 2023 and when the matter was taken up earlier, this Court has directed the petitioners in Crl.O.P.No.24564 of 2023 to produce demand draft for a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- on 24.04.2024, to show their bonafide, but they have not taken any steps to show their bonafide and to settle the issue, it shows that the petitioners are intend to cheat the defacto complainant and also seeing the conduct of the petitioners that they have nearly collected Rs. 2 Crores by mesmerizing the defacto complainant that they know some influential persons, so that they can get job to the 18 persons and also conducted fake interview in Delhi for the said 18 victims. All these facts clearly needs some custodial interrogation, hence this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6.
As this case is pending for a long time, this Court directs the prosecution to secure the accused at the earliest for judicial custody, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this Order. 7.
According, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. For 4/6
compliance report, post the case on 03.06.2024. 25.04.2024 stn T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
5/6
stn Crl.O.P.No.24564 of 2023 and Crl.O.P.Nos.2594 and 3833 of 2024 25.04.2024 6/6