Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/1488/2025dismissed

Arumugam Pillai v. The State Of Tamilnadu

2025-01-27Honourable Mr Justice N. Anand Venkatesh4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 27/01/2025 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH CRL OP(MD). No.1488 of 2025 Arumugam Pillai ... Petitioner/Accused No.1 Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, CCB, Madurai.

Crime No. 2/2025.

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.B.E. Ashwin Bala Someshwerar, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.G.Kalidas, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 2 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.

1/4

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 61(2), 296, 318(4) and 351(2) BNS (hereinafter referred to as new penal code) in Crime No.2 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons received a total sum of Rs.1,00,95,000/- with a promise that they will purchase a house for the defacto complainant. However, neither a property was purchased nor the amount was returned back. There are totally six accused persons in this case and the petitioner has been arrayed as A1.

3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police on instructions submitted that insofar as the petitioner is concerned, totally a sum of Rs.19,30,000/- came into his account. He further submitted that the amounts have also been credited to the account of the other accused persons and that all the accused persons had joined together and cheated the defacto complainant to the tune of Rs.1,00,95,000/-.

2/4

4.In the instant case, the defacto complainant is said to be employed at Odisha and he wanted to buy a house and had approached the accused persons. After having received such a huge amount, the property was not purchased and the amount was also not returned back. Prima facie, this Court finds moral turpitude on the part of the accused persons. Hence, this is not a case which deserves grant of anticipatory bail.

5.Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. Sd/- 27/01/2025 / TRUE COPY / /02/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

LR 3/4

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CCB, MADURAI.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.1488 of 2025 Date :27/01/2025 ES/SKN/SAR /20.02.2025/4P/3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023.

4/4