Nandhakumar v. The State Rep.By

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

The petitioner/A4, who apprehends arrest in connection with Crime No.151 of 2024, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 306 of BNS 2023 read with Section 3(5) of BNS 2023 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused, who are employees of the defacto complainant's company viz., Vault CMS Infosystem Ltd., T.Nagar, were engaged in the work of deposit and withdraw the money in the Automated Teller Machine(ATM) for various Banks. In pursuant to the same, the amount deposited by various customers in the account of the complainant bank was diverted to the account of A1 with the help of other accused and had misappropriated to the tune of Rs.1 crore. Hence the case.

3.Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he had been falsely implicated in this case and that the co-accused, who have been arrested, were released on bail. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to abide by

any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and prays for the grant of anticipatory bail to him.

4.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, would submit that the petitioner and other accused, while working under defacto complainant's company, were engaged in the work of deposit and withdraw the money in the Automated Teller Machine(ATM) for various Banks, they had diverted the money to the account of A1 with the help of other accused and had misappropriated to the tune of Rs.1 crore. He would further submit that from the arrested accused, Rs.76,00,000/- has already been recovered and the balance misappropriated amount of Rs.24,00,000/- is yet to be recovered and that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required and the possibility of recovering the amount would be bleak.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent and perused the entire materials available on record.

6.Taking into consideration the nature of offence and the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) that the balance misappropriated amount of Rs.24,00,000/- is yet to be recovered from the petitioner and thereby, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

07.11.2024 raa

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

raa 07.11.2024