Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/18049/2017dismissed as infructuous

M.Rajashanmuga, v. The Inspector Of Police,

2018-03-01Honourable Mr Justice R. Pongiappan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the First day of March Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL OP(MD) No.18049 of 2017 M.RAJASHANMUGA ... PETITIONER / SOLE ACCUSED Vs 1 THE STATE REP.BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUDUR POLICE STATION, MADURAI.

IN CR.NO.NOT KNOWN OF 2017. ... 1st RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT 2 SANTHIYAGU KASPAR ... 2nd RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.R.MURUGAN Advocate For Respondent 1 : MR.A.ROBINSON Govt. 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 sole accused, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offence punishable under Sections 420 r/w 120(b) of I.P.C., registered in Crime No.not known of 2017, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that when the defacto complainant demanded the petitioner to arrange a loan for agricultural purpose, the petitioner arranged the same. Thereafter, the defacto complainant refused to avail the loan. Even though the defacto complainant had not availed the loan arranged by the petitioner, the petitioner insisting the defacto complainant to refund a sum of Rs.87,000/- as process fee. Hence the complaint was lodged by the defacto complainant.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case, he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he is in no way connected with the offences, hence he pleads for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police submitted that in this regard, a case has been

registered in Crime No.5/2018 for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 468, 471 and 506 (I) of IPC. Further, the petitioner was arrested on 02.01.2018. Hence, the prayer becomes infructuous.

5.Recording the said submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) this criminal original petition is dismissed as infructuous.

sd/- 01/03/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUDUR POLICE STATION, MADURAI.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.18049 of 2017 Date :01/03/2018 MKV-PM-PN-SAR 2/8.3.2018/2P-3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/