K. Velusamy v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Sixth day of July Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.10587 of 2015 K. VELUSAMY ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, THENI DT, CRIME NO.22/2015 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.N.MOHIDEEN BASHA Advocate For Respondent : MRS.S.PRABHA, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervenor : MR.B.BRIJESH KISHORE,Advocate PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as sole accused in Crime No.22 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.06.2015 for the alleged offences punishable under Section 406 and 420 of I.P.C., and hence, seeks bail. 2.The petitioner was granted interim bail by this Court on 12.06.2015 to settle the dispute with the de-facto complainant. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per direction of this Court, the petitioner appeared before the Mediation Centre, but the de-facto complainant was not able to produce any proof for the payment of Rs.4,50,000/- to secure employment in TNEB for his son.

It is further submitted that even in the complaint, it is not specifically stated as to when the amount was given and what is the mode of payment and in whose presence, the amount was paid to the accused. It is further submitted that unless the de-facto complainant produced proof, the accused cannot return the amount to the de-facto complainant. 4.The learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ de-facto complainant is a retired Government employee and he had paid the amount of Rs.

government job and due to which, he suffered from hyper tension and he was admitted in a Government Hospital. It is further submitted that the accused in his own hand writing admitted the receipt of Rs.4,50,000/-, but now he disputed his signature.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) would submit that apart from this case, the respondent has also received two other complaints from the other persons in which, the accused by giving assurance of getting employment in Noon Meals Organisation, received Rs.1,50,000/- from each complainant.

6.Considering the above said submissions, interim bail already granted by this Court on 12.06.2015, is cancelled. Hence, this petition is dismissed. The respondent police is directed to secure the accused and take action as per law.

sd/- 06/07/2015 / 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, THENI DISTRICT.

THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON,MADURAI.

THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S.N.MOHIDEEN BASHA Advocate SR.No.36651

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10587 of 2015 Date :06/07/2015 PA/SJW/07.07.2015/2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/