Jagadeesh Pandi, v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Seventeenth day of December Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.NIRMAL KUMAR CRL OP(MD) No.21377 of 2018 JAGADEESH PANDI ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.
(CRIME NO.19/2017) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : MrS.C.DEIVASIGAMANI, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.M.ASOKAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- [Orders Reserved on 04.12.2018] The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406, 408, 465, 468, 477-A and 381 of IPC., in Crime No.19 of 2017, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused altered the accounts in a forged manner and cheated the Hi-Tech Polytechnic College, to the tune of Rs.36,22,460/-.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed as a Clerk on 29.05.2012 in the Hi-Tech Polytechnic College, where the defacto complainant is working as Vice-Principal. The nature of his duty is to collect the fees from the student daily and in turn hand over the cash and the receipt book to the defacto complainant at the time after a thorough check and verification, the defacto complainant received the same. It is his further contention that the Acting Chairman of the Management directed the petitioner to collect fees from the SC/ST students, even though they have been sanctioned the amount by the Government. Since the petitioner noticed misappropriation committed by the Management to the concerned Authorities, to wreck vengeance https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
and with malafide intention, the Management lodge a false complaint against him.
4. The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the respondent submitted that since the accused altered the accounts in a forged manner and cheated the Hi-Tech Polytechnic College, to the tune of Rs.36,22,460/- and the investigation is in initial stage and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much necessary to find out the truth, he strongly opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. I have heard the learned counsels appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the submissions of the learned Government Advocate (crl.side), this Court is not inclined to grant the relief of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.
sd/- 17/12/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO
1. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.
2. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to Mr.C.DEIVASIGAMANI Advocate SR.No.100474
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.21377 of 2018 Date :17/12/2018 MS/PN-AC/SAR-3/20.12.2018/2P.4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/