Kaliyammal 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.8371 of 2016 KALIYAMMAL ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 Vs STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, RAMANATHAURAM DISTRICT, RAMANATHAURAM (CRIME NO.42 OF 2015) ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S .M.MANIMEGALAI, Advocate For Respondent : M/S.P.KANNITHEVAN, 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.2, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 406 and 420 IPC, in Crime No.42 of 2015, on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and two others promised to arrange the job in the Government Hospital and received a sum of Rs.8,45,000/- from the de facto complainant. But, they did not arrange the job and return the amount. When the de facto complainant demanded them for refund of amount, she threatened him with dire consequences. On complaint case has been registered for the above said offences.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is the wife of A1 and A1 was kidnapped by the de facto complainant and the petitioner filed HCP and due to that a false complaint has been lodged against the petitioner.

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

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent submitted that this is a case of job-racketing and on promising to get a job, the petitioner and other accused persons cheated the de facto complainant. He further submitted that A.1 was arrested and he is in judicial custody. The earlier petition filed by the petitioner for anticipatory bail in Crl.O.P(MD)No.23957 of 2015 was dismissed on 06.01.20106 and there is no change of circumstance.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the serious allegations levelled against the petitioner and the earlier petition for anticipatory bail filed by the petitioner, was dismissed by this Court and there is no change of circumstance, 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 ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 2.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, RAMANATHAURAM DISTRICT, RAMANATHAURAM RL/3C/2P/KBM/SARII/23/6/2016

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.8371 of 2016 Date :20/06/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/