Meenakshi v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 08/03/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP(MD). No.5891 of 2022 1.Meenakshi 2.Anbu Pandiyan 3.Akshaya ... Petitioners/A1 to A3 Vs 1.The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Keelavalavu Police Station, MaduraiDistrict.

(crime No.1227 of 2020).

2.Manjula ... Respondents/Complainants [R2 is suo-motu impleaded as per Order of this Court dated 01.04.2022 in CRL OP(MD)No.5891/2022 BY KMSJ] For Petitioners : M/s.C.R.Ponnuthai, Advocate.

For R1 : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (crl. side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.1227 of 2020 on the file of the Respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A1 to A3, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 294(b) and 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.1227 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the first petitioner, in the guise of false promise to secure Anganvadi Job for the de-facto complainant's friends and others, had received Rs.7,10,000/- from them and later, neither secured job nor return the said amount. When the same was questioned by the de-facto complainant, the petitioners abused her in filthy language and also threatened her with dire consequences. Hence, the case.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

3.Heard. Perused the materials available on records including the First Information Report.

4.On perusal of the records it shows that it is a case of job racketing. The petitioners received a sum of Rs.7,10,000/- from the victims and thereafter, they failed to secure any job and refused to return the amount to the defacto complainant and other victims. Therefore, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is very much necessary in this case. Apart from that, the petitioners also suppressed the dismissal of the earlier anticipatory bail petition by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6838 of 2020 dated 28.09.2020, they have filed the present application for anticipatory bail. 5.Taking note of the above facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of the serious allegations made against the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 08/03/2023 / TRUE COPY / /03/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

SJI TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KEELAVALAVU POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT. 2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.5891 of 2022 Date :08/03/2023 SA/MMS/SAR.4/23/03/2023/2P/3C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis