Vinoth Kumar v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twelfth day of July Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.11210 & 11211 of 2016 VINOTH KUMAR ... PETITIONER /SOLE ACCUSED IN BOTH THE PETITIONS Vs STATE REP.BY ITS THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KOVILPATTI EAST POLICE STATION, TUTICORIN DISTRICT, (CRIME NO. 320 OF 2016 IN CRL OP(MD)NO.11210/2016 CRIME NO.319/2016 IN CRL OP(MD)NO.11211/2016) ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT IN BOTH THE PETITIONS For Petitioner : M/S M.SARAVANAN Advocate IN BOTH THE PETITIONS For Respondent : MR.P.KANNITHEVAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) IN BOTH THE PETITIONS 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 an alleged offence punishable under Sections 379,441 and 464 of IPC in Crime Nos.320 and 319 of 2016 respectively seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the Secretary of school and the petitioner is doing contract work and supplied the workers and for which the amount due, the petitioner gave three cheques. On presentation, the cheques were dis honoured. The defacto complainant initiated proceedings under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and the same is pending. While so, using the key of the school which was with his mother and has stolen the cheques belonging to the Account of the Parents - Teachers Association and forged the signature of the defacto complainants, who are President and Secretary of the Parents Teachers Association and issued and presented the same and the cheques were returned and issued notice to the defacto complainant falsely accusing of the defacto complainant. On complaint, a case has been registered against the petitioner.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and his name has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is doing construction work for the school and the defacto complainant gave a cheque for a sum of Rs.6,80,000/- from the Parents-Teachers Association Account and cheque was dishonoured, on presentation, for want of funds. The defacto complainant has given a false complaint trying to make out a criminal case in a civil case.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is that he exercised his position as son of the Secretary of the School and had stolen the cheques belonging to the Account of the Parents-Teachers Association and forged the signature of the defacto complainant and the investigation of the case is pending.
5. Considering the serious nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 12/07/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TRP TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,KOVILPATTI EAST POLICE STATION, TUTICORIN DISTRICT, 2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+2. CC to M/S M.SARAVANAN Advocate SR.No.35977, 35978 GJM/PEK/SAR-II-22.7.16-2P-5C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.11210 & 11211 of 2016 Date :12/07/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/