V.N.Jayakanth v. The State Rep By Its,

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.11.2022 for the alleged offence under Sections 406, 420 r/w Section 34 IPC in Cr.No.204 of 2022, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant is that the petitioner under the guise of getting job in Government had induced the defacto complainant and received a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-. However, he neither secured a job nor returned the money. Hence, the case. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit 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 bail.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that it is a case of job racketing. The allegation is that the petitioner under the guise of getting job in Government had induced the defacto complainant

and received a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-. However, he neither secured a job nor returned the money. He would submit that the petitioner had cheated 30 victims on false promise of getting a job in Government to the tune of Rs.88,00,000/-. He would further submit that sofar 13 complaints have been received against the petitioner. Therefore, if he is enlarged on bail, he would tamper the evidence. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Mr.M.Naresh Babu, learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant/Intervenor would submit that the petitioner had induced the defacto complainant and received a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- and cheated him. Sofar, 30 victims have been identified by the respondent, who had been cheated by the petitioner. He would further submit that the petitioner is the main accused. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. On a perusal of the materials available on records, it reveals that it is a case of job racketing and this case requires a detailed investigation. Therefore, if he is released on bail, he would tamper the

evidence. Hence, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 09.12.2022 anu

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

anu 09.12.2022