Kabilan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Eighteenth day of July Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.10336 of 2016 KABILAN ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.3 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CITY CRIME BRANCH, TIRUNELVELI.(CRIME NO. 13 OF 2016) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S R.ANAND Advocate For Respondent : M/S.P.KANNITHEVAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervenor : M/s.R.MURUGAN PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.3, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 465, 471, 468, 473, 120 (B) of IPC, in Crime No.13 of 2016, on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused availed loan by depositing the forged documents and caused loss to the Bank to the tune of Rs.1,44,57,000/-. On complaint, case has been registered for the above said offences. 3.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He is not the beneficiary of the loan and the amount was sanctioned only after verification of the document.

4.The learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that the petitioner along with other accused persons forged the document and forged the Income Tax returns and submitted before the Bank and the same property was given as security for three loans by the petitioner and two other persons. Without having any title to the property by forging the documents including the income tax returns. The property does not belong to the petitioner and other accused persons. They also manipulated the income tax returns and caused https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

loss to the Bank to the tune of Rs.1,44,57,000/- and prayed for dismissal of the anticipatory bail.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that the investigation is at initial stage. If the petitioner is granted anticipatory, he will absconding and tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation.

6.Considering the serious nature of allegations and also considering the fact that they caused loss to the Bank for a sum of Rs.1,44,57,000/- by depositing the forged documents and income tax returns, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory to the petitioner. Hence, this petition is dismissed. sd/- 18/07/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CITY CRIME BRANCH, TIRUNELVELI.

2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI JA-DB-SAR.I/22.07.2016/2P;3C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10336 of 2016 Date :18/07/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/