Akilandeshwari, v. The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Fifth day of March Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL OP(MD) No.16701 of 2017 AKILANDESHWARI ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.1 Vs STATE REP.BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CITY CRIME BRANCH, TRICHY CITY.

(IN CRIME NO.25 OF 2017) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.M.SURESH Advocate For Respondent : M/S.A.ROBINSON, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 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.1, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 406 and 420 of IPC and Section 10 of Emigration Act, in Crime No.25 of 2017, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner herein and other accused are running a man power company and they have collected amount from various people for arranging job at Canada. Subsequently, they failed to repay the amount and also not send them to abroad. Thus, on complaint, a case has been registered against the petitioners.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution and his name has been falsely implicated in this case.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that the investigation of the case is pending.

5.The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side are considered.

6. It is alleged, during the time of occurrence, the petitioner and another accused, who is the husband of the petitioner, collected money from various persons after making the false promise, for arranging job at Canada. For the above said process, the petitioner and her husband collected a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- from each persons and thereafter, they have not fulfilled the promise as agreed at the time of receiving the amount. So far, single pie is not recovered from this petitioner or from her husband. Further, the total amount cheated in this case is nearly Rupees One Crore Fifty Seven Lakhs. So, for the offence committed by the petitioner, custodial interrogation is very much necessary for completing the investigation. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

sd/- 05/03/2018 / 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, TRICHY CITY.

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

+1. CC to M/S.M.SURESH Advocate SR.No.3489

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.16701 of 2017 Date :05/03/2018 PK/RR-CSL/SAR-4/19.03.2018 : 2P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/