D.Lalitha v. State Rep By

CRL.O.P.No.30204 of 2022 T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 120(B), 406, 420 of IPC in Cr.No.2 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with accused No.2, who is husband of this petitioner was running a Jewellery Shop under the name and style of Lalithambigai Silver Jewellery at Salem and canvassed that on deposit for the Jewellery the depositors can take the jewellery without any commission and various other schemes in respect of deposit. Believing the accused words the defacto complainant one Saraswathy deposited total sum of Rs.10,75,600/-. After maturity she has not received any amount or jewellery from the accused as promised by them and subsequently she was cheated by the A1 concern. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence prays for

grant of anticipatory bail.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that the case is under investigation and Rs.10,75,000/- is involved in this case. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration the submission made by the learned Government Advocate, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 04.01.2023 kmm

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

kmm CRL.O.P.No.30204 of 2022 04.01.2023