D.Lovely Jasmine v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Nineteenth day of November Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.21756 of 2015 D.LOVELY JASMINE ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED No.1 Vs 1 THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE S.S.COLONY POLICE STATION, MADURAI CR.No. 886 of 2015 ...1st RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT 2 PUNNIYA KARTHIK ... 2nd RESPONDENT / DEFACTI COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S M.S.SARAVANAKUMAR Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.Anbarasan Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.G.Mohankumar Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as A1, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police, for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 406, 420, 294(B), 342, 323 and 506 (ii) I.P.C., in Crime No.886 of 2015, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and two others colluded together and received a sum of Rs.11,50,000/- from the de-facto complainant, promising to get a job in Government.

3. The case of the petitioner is that she is only introduced the defacto complainant to A2 and A3. The de-facto complainant deposited the amount in the petitioner's Bank Account and the same was withdrawn and paid to A3.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that already the petitioner and one S.Navaneeth Menon/A3 have filed Cr.M.P.No.7155/2015, for Anticipatory Bail, on the file of District and Sessions Court, Madurai and the same was dismissed as not pressed on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

17.11.2015. Suppressing the said fact, the petitioner has filed the present Criminal Original Petition, on 16.11.2015. The petitioner and others are involved in the Job racketing.

6. The learned counsel for the Intervenor submitted that before the District and Sessions Court, the petitioner has taken a different stand stating totally a different story and suppressing the same, she has come out with the present Criminal Original Petition.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering fact that the amount has been deposited in the petitioner's bank account, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, the anticipatory bail petition is dismissed. sd/- 19/11/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE S.S.COLONY POLICE STATION, MADURAI 2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S G.Mohan Kumar, Advocate SR.No. 66416 TS/23.11.2015/2P-4C/GSV-PM/SAR II

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.21756 of 2015 Date :19/11/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/