D. Ancy Elizabeth v. State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16-12-2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP NO. 28977 of 2024 1.Mrs.D.Ancy Elizabeth 2.S.Nalini ..Petitioners/A1&A2 Vs The State Rep By Its F-5, Choolaimedu (Crime) Police Station Choolaimedu Chennai- 600 095.

..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition filed u/s. 482 of BNSS Act, 2023 praying to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent police in Crime No. 579 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.Mohanraj For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate [Criminal Side] --

ORDER

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.579 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 506(i) of IPC, the present petition has been filed seeking anticipatory bail. Page No.1 of 4

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners/A1&A2 floated three schemes under the guise of running chits, had collected amounts to the tune of Rs.93,67,250/- from 20 victims and later, Rs.23,55,250/- repaid by the petitioners and Rs.70,12,000/- remains to be paid by the accused. Hence the complaint.

3. Pleading innocence on the part of the petitioner, false implication in the case, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks indulgence of this Court. He further submits that the petitioners are innocent and the petitioners actually collected Rs.39,00,000/- and Rs.18,00,000/- had been already repaid and Rs.21,00,000/- remains to be paid. He would further submit that there is no previous case is pending against them. He would submit that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this court.

4. The case of the prosecution, as put forth by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, opposing for grant of bail, is that the petitioners had collected money to the Page No.2 of 4

tune of Rs.93,67,250/- from 20 victims under the guise of "Jeyam Chit Fund" and thereafter, the petitioners had cheated the de-facto complainant. He would further submits that the petitioners have repaid some amount, as per the prosecution Rs.70,12,000/- remains to be paid by the petitioners.

5. The learned Counsel for the Intervenor submits that the accused had introduced the de-facto complainant with several other victims and the petitioners had collected Rs.93,67,250/- from more than 20 victims and they had cheated the de-facto complainant. Therefore, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6.Considering the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), and the investigation has been pending, at this stage, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 16.12.2024 MSM Page No.3 of 4

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.

MSM CRL OP NO. 28977 of 2024 16.12.2024 Page No.4 of 4