Ezhilarasan v. The State Rep.By

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

The petitioner in Crime No.10 of 2023 registered by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC seeks anticipatory bail.

2. It is stated by the Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for respondent police that A1, A2 and A3 belong to one family and the present petitioner/A3 is the son of A1. It is stated that they had collected a sum of Rs.52,48,000/- from 20 unfortunate victims promising to give them job in Anganvadi. The said post, is a group D Post and only those who are extremely, economically deprived would have fallen into the trap of this petitioner, as they would seek any job and would be prepared to pay money for it. Neither did the accused persons the jobs nor they did return the money back.

1/3

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the accused had received only a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and the petitioner is prepared to deposit the same. None of the accused had been arrested so far.

4. Taking all those factors into consideration, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

Vv 29.01.2024 2/3

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

Vv 29.01.2024 3/3