Jegatheesh Pandi v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twenty Fourth day of January Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL OP(MD) No.752 of 2018 JEGATHEESH PANDI ... PETITIONER / SOLE ACCUSED Vs THE STATE REP.BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, TIRUNELVELI, CR.NO.19/2017 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : MR.S.PACKIARAJ for M/S.T.A.EBENEZER Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.ROBINSON Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervenor : MR.N.PRAGALATHAN Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 408, 465, 468, 477(A) & 381 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 petitioner has misappropriated a sum of Rs.36,22,460/-, which was sanctioned in favour of SC/ST people as scholarship by falsifying the accounts. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he is no way connected with the offences, and pleads for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent Police submitted that the misappropriate amount was not recovered and the investigation is still pending. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5.The submissions made by the learned counsel on either side are considered. This case has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 408, 465, 468, 477(A) & 381 IPC. It is alleged that during the time of occurrence, a sum of Rs.36,22,460/-, which was sanctioned in favour of SC/ST people as scholarship was misappropriate after falsifying the accounts. As per the submissions of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), the misappropriate amount was not recovered. In order to complete the investigation recovery is necessary. If anticipatory bail is granted in favour of the petitioner, it will prejudice the process of the investigation.

6.Taking all the above said aspects into consideration and having regard to the nature of offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 24/01/2018 / 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.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.752 of 2018 Date :24/01/2018 MKV-CM-VR-SAR 4/1.2.2018/2P-3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/