V.Krishnan v. The Inspector Of Police

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b) and 506(1) of IPC in Cr.No.829 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant borrowed a sum of Rs.17,00,000/- from the first petitioner and the interest amount fixed per month is Rs.34,000/- and the defacto complainant was paying the interest regularly. Thereafter due to demonetization the defacto complainant failed to pay the interest, due to which the first petitioner and the son-in-law of the first petitioner/ second petitioner herein along with the other petitioners threatened the defacto complainant and allegedly transferred the property in the name of the brother of the first petitioner. Hence, the law enforcing agency registered a case against the petitioners. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence he

prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the defacto complainant borrowed money from the first petitioner and thereafter received exorbitant interest from the defacto complainant and also threatened the defacto complainant and allegedly transferred the property in the name of the brother of the first petitioner. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the gravity of offence committed by the petitioners, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 06.01.2023 smn

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

smn 06.01.2023