Prabhu Baskaran v. State Represented By, The Inspector Of Police

CRL OP NO. 32182 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 06-01-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP NO. 32182 of 2024 1.Prabhu Baskaran S/o.Baskaran 2.Meera Kanderi W/o.Prabhu Baskaran Both are residing at No.14,3rd Maun Road, Krishnapuram, Thiruninravur, Chennai-602024.

Petitioners(s) Vs State rep by, The Inspector of police, Economic Offence Wing Headquarters Chennai, (Crime No.10 of 2024) Respondent(s) For petitioners(s):

Mr. A.M. Venkatakrishnan, Mr. T.Pandiyan, Mr. R.Saravanan, Mr. S.Deepak, Mr. G.Praveen Rajesh Mr. R.B. Aparajitha For Respondent(s):

Mr. S. Santhosh, Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 34, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (I.P.C) read with Section 5 of Tamil Nadu Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishment) Act, (TNPID) 1997, in Crime No.10 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused floated various lucrative schemes promising huge returns and also offering land and properties, thereby induced several gullible victims and cheating them of Rs.3.5 crore. Hence the complaint.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons, who have been falsely implicated in this case and they are merely employees and had no role in collecting funds. He further submitted that the petitioners are willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, and therefore, prayed for the grant of anticipatory

bail.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed for grant of bail to the petitioners stating that the accused cheated gullible victims on the assurance of giving huge returns and also offering land. As far as the petitioners are concerned, they worked as agents for the company, inducting 73 investors and collecting Rs.1.37 crore, for which, they have also received commission of Rs.12,42,600/-. He further submitted that the investigation is at an initial stage, and despite four summons, the petitioners have not responded. Therefore, if the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail, there is a possibility that they will tamper with evidences and threaten witnesses, and it would cause hardship to proceed the investigation. A detailed counter has also been filed in this regard.

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

6. This is the first application for anticipatory bail. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, wherein the petitioners allegedly committed a breach of trust and cheated numerous gullible victims, including the de-facto complainant, to the tune of Rs.3.5 crore, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 06-01-2025 klt To State rep by, The Inspector of police, Economic Offence Wing Headquarters Chennai, (Crime No. 10 of 2024)

A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

klt CRL.OP. No.32182 of 2024 06-01-2025