Stebhen Raja @ Stebhen v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty Sixth day of February Two Thousand and Twenty Four PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI STEBHEN RAJA @ STEBHEN ... PETITIONER / SOLE ACCUSED Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THENI POLICE STATION, THENI DISTRICT.

CR.NO.64/2024 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.ARUN SWAMINATHAN.RM. Advocate For Respondent : Mr.B.NAMBISELVAN, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. PRAYER:- FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CRIME NO. 64/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE RESPONDENT POLICE.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner/Sole Accused, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 417 and 420 of IPC, in Crime No.64 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 1/3

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, without obtaining any permission from the respondent police, in order to conduct a marathon event collected Rs.300/- from the participants and thereafter, cheated them. Hence, the case.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in order to conduct the marathon event, the petitioner made an application before the respondent police for permission and the respondent police have not considered the petitioner's application. Thereby, the petitioner has conducted marathon event without any permission and the amount collected from the participants is for providing first and second prizes and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that some of the amount was refunded. Hence, he pray for anticipatory bail.

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that in order to conduct the marathon event, the petitioner collected Rs.300/- from the innocent people and thereafter, cheated the defacto complainant and other people. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the petitioner conducted the marathon event without obtaining any prior permission from the respondent police or the District Collector and for affecting the 2/3

entire vehicular traffic and the petitioner also collected Rs.300/- from the participants, without providing any facility to them, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 26/02/2024 / TRUE COPY / /02/2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

SJI TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THENI POLICE STATION, THENI DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN Date :26/02/2024 SA/VR/SAR. /29.02.2024/3P/3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023. 3/3