Daisy Rani @ Susila v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twentieth day of June Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.6990 of 2016 DAISY RANI @ SUSILA ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED No.2 Vs State represented by THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ANNA NAGAR POLICE STATION, MADURAI.

(CRIME NO. 1188 OF 2016) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S T.A.EBENEZER Advocate For Respondent : Mr.P.Kannithevan 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 Accused No.2, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 406 and 420 364-A IPC, in Crime No.1188 of 2016, on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant is working as a reporter in Dina Anjal daily. One advocate by name Udaya Singh/A.1 informed him that he would arrange a sum of Rs.50,000/- as loan for women through Social Welfare Department and he demanded a sum of Rs.2,000/- for the expenses for preparing quotations and for project report. The de facto complainant collected a sum of Rs.2,000/- each from 38 persons i.e., a total sum of Rs.76,000/- and gave the same to the said Udaya Singh and the said Udaya Singh introduced one Daisy Rani/A.2 to the petitioner and she informed the petitioner that she would arrange loan for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and asked him to pay a sum of Rs.1,100/- for loan and accordingly the de facto complainant collected a sum of Rs.1,100/- each from 275 persons i.e., a total sum of Rs.3,02,500/- and handed over the same to the said Daisy Rani/A.2 and Uday Singh and they did not arrange loan nor return the money and accordingly they cheated the persons. On complaint case has been registered for the above said offences.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is an innocent person and she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner did not collect any money and she has not made any promise. She has been falsely implicated. A.1 has only collected money from various persons and failed to return the same and in the said dispute, she has been falsely implicated. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) submitted that investigation is in preliminary stage and the petitioner and A.1 collected money from more than 300 persons and it has to be found out from how many persons, A.1 and the petitioner collected money and whether they have arranged any loan to them and if the petitioner is released on anticipatory bail, she will abscond. 5.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the petitioner and A.1 collected money from women belonging to various self help groups on the promise to get loan and failed to arrange loan and did not return the amount and cheated the poor women and investigation is pending, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and accordingly this petition is dismissed.

sd/- 20/06/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ANNA NAGAR POLICE STATION, MADURAI.

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

+1. CC to M/S T.A.EBENEZER Advocate SR.No.31769 sm:SKS-RR:SAR II:24.06.2016:2P/4C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.6990 of 2016 Date :20/06/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/