Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/9695/2018dismissed

Essakkimuthu v. The Insepctor Of Police

2018-07-04Honourable Mrs Justice R. Tharani2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Fourth day of July Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs.Justice R.THARANI CRL OP(MD) No.9695 of 2018 ESSAKKIMUTHU ...PETITIONER/ ACCUSED No.4 Vs THE INSEPCTOR OF POLICE THIRUTHANGAL POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

Crime No. 238 of 2018 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : Mr.A.THIRUVADI KUMAR Advocate For Respondent : Mr.M.CHANDRASEKARAN Additional Public Prosecutor 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 the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120(b), 204(b) and 506(i) of I.P.C. in Crime No.238 of 2018 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused persons cheated the complainant and hence a case has been registered against the petitioner.

3.On the side of the petitioner, it is stated that the petitioner is no way connected with the offence, the petitioner is only a driver of A1, the only overtact against the petitioner is that the amount of Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs was given in his presence. It is further stated that A1 in this case was already released on bail and there is no allegation that the driver received any amount and hence, he prayed to be released on bail. 4.On the side of the respondent, it is stated that the petitioner is only a driver of A1 and the main accused A1 was already released on statutory bail on 28.01.2018. The petitioner is the employee of A1, there are one more case against the petitioner in Crime No.315 of 2018 and the amount involved is Rupees Thirty Lakhs, whereas in this case the amount involved is Rupees Twenty https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Five Lakhs. Moreover, it is further stated that this petitioner is involved in a case in Crime No.92 of 2018 on the file of Thiruthangal Police Station and that custodial interrogation is necessary, objected this petition.

5. Since the offence committed by the petitioner is severe in nature and the amount involved is huge and that the investigation is still pending and that the custodial interrogation is necessary. In these circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

sd/- 04/07/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE INSEPCTOR OF POLICE THIRUTHANGAL POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9695 of 2018 Date :04/07/2018 TK/MMS/VK/18.07.2018/2P-3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/