Konda Sireesha v. The State Rep. By Its Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02-01-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP NO. 31644 of 2024 Konda Sireesha W/o.Konda Prasad Reddy, No.301, 3rd Floor, Srinivas Puram Tiruchanoor Road, Near Saibaba Temble Yogimalvaram, Chittor Andhra Pradesh - 517 503.

Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. By Its Inspector Of Police, T-1, Tambaram Police Station, Tambaram, Tambaram District. (crime No.484 Of 2024) Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Parthipan J For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.484 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of BNS, 2023, the present petition has been filed seeking anticipatory bail.

2. Pleading innocence on the part of the petitioner, false implication in the case, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks indulgence of this court. He

would submit that the case of money dispute has been falsely projected as a case of cheating. He would submit that, after registration of the FIR, the petitioner was said to have returned an amount of Rs.7,50,000/- to the defacto complainant. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court.

3. The case of the prosecution as putforth by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, opposing for the grant of anticipatory bail is that, the petitioner on the assurance of giving huge returns received an amount of Rs.15 lakhs from the defacto complainant and later, cheated the defacto complainant. He would further submit that, apart from cheating the defacto complainant, several other persons was also cheated by the petitioner to the tune of Rs.21,50,000/-.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor vehemently opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent Police, the

learned counsel appearing for the intervenor and perused the materials available on record.

6. Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, and also the fact that several persons have been cheated by the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 02.01.2025 (1/2) dsn

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.

dsn 02.01.2025 (1/2)