M. Hemalatha v. The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Nineteenth day of January Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT THE HON`BLE MR JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.23858 of 2014 1 M.HEMALATHA 2 R.MURUGAN 3 R.SARAVANAN ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED NOS.2 TO 4 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUVARUMPUR POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO. 649/2013) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT [NOW PENDING IN THE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, TRICHY DISTRICT] For Petitioner : MR.VEERA KATHIRAVAN, SENIOR COUNSEL for M/S.K.PRABHU, Advocate For Respondent : MR.C.RAMESH, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For Intervener : MR.M.SURESH, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.649 of 2013, seek anticipatory bail.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the Intervenor and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

3. This is second anticipatory bail petition and the first anticipatory bail petition in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.23666 of 2013 was dismissed on 03.06.2014.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that Manimuthu https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (A1) in this case was already arrested and released on bail.

5. The State has filed a detailed counter affidavit, objecting to the grant of anticipatory bail to these petitioners.

6. It is an admitted fact that Manimuthu (A1), Murugan (A3) and Saravanan (A4) are brothers. Hemalatha (A2) is the wife of Manimuthu (A1). The defacto complainant in this case is the brother-in-law of A1, A3 and A4 and he married their sister by name Gomathi. It is alleged by the defacto complainant that he is working in United States and he sent Rs.43,55,000/- to the petitioners herein to buy properties in his name, but whereas the petitioners, on receipt of money from the defacto complainant, purchased properties in their names.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that Gomathi, wife of the defacto complainant has sent a letter to the Superintendent of Police, stating that this case has been engineered by her husband falsely.

8. On reading of the letter sent by Gomathi, it appears that she is desperately making all attempts to save her brothers. In view of the serious nature of allegation against these petitioners, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to these petitioners. Hence, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 19/01/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUVARUMPUR POLICE STATION, THIRUCHIRAPPALLI.

2 THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, TRICHY DISTRICT. 3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S.M.SURESH, Advocate SR.No.2060. +1. CC to M/S.M/S.K.PRABHU, Advocate SR.No.2193. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.23858 of 2014 Date :19/01/2015 msm 20.01.2015 p2/6c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/