Hariharan v. The State Rep By

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.10.2022 for the alleged offence under Sections 406, 420 r/w 120 B of I.P.C. in Crime No.200 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is running an unregistered travel agency in the name of M/s.Aalfa Global Connect at Vadapalani and M/s. United India Travels at Spencer Plaza and he along with other accused promised to get employment at Canada for 11 persons and collected money and passport, but not secured any employment and also not returned the amount collected from them and not responding to calls. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is a M.B.A. Graduate of U.K University, he is a pilot holding P.A.I license and a trainer of paragliding at Pondicherry. He would submit that he has not at

all committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police and he is no way connected with the said concern. He would submit that as he is happened to be husband of A1 and there is no overtact attributed against him and his name is not found in the F.I.R. He would submit that there is no role of the petitioner in the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated as accused in this case. He would further submit that the investigation is almost completed and that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration for more than 48 days from 19.10.2022. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that so far 36 victims were affected and 49 fake passports were seized from the accused and nearly a sum of Rs.1 crore was cheated by the accused. He would submit that the petitioner is the Managing Director of the said company and he is husband of A1. He would submit that he along with other accused have given false advertisement through online stating that they will secure job at foreign countries and collected huge amount from the victims and issued fake visa to them. He would also submit that if he is released on bail, he will tamper the witnesses

and hamper the investigation and the investigation is not yet completed. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by both counsel and considering the gravity of offence committed by the petitioner, and also on seeing his bank account, huge amount was transferred through his account, investigation is still pending and there is possibility of tampering the witnesses and hampering the investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 07.12.2022 rpp

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

rpp 07.12.2022