Selvaraj v. The Inspector Of Police,

CRL OP(MD). No.7333 of 2023 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20.04.2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP(MD). No.7333 of 2023 Selvaraj ... Petitioner/accused rank not known Vs State rep., by The Inspector of Police, Sessions Court Police Station, Trichy City.

(Crime No.86 of 2023) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Ms.T.Lavanya, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.86/2023 on the file of the Respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/accused rank not known, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC, in Crime No.86 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant approached the accused person, who is running finance company, for obtaining loan in order to settle her financial crisis. The accused person also received a sum of Rs.30 Lakhs from the defacto complainant for stamp papers and thereafter, the accused cheated the defacto complainant. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been doing finance business by lending money through private finance. The other accused persons were working under him during the period 2021-2022. They misused the name of the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/2

CRL OP(MD). No.7333 of 2023 petitioner and cheated the defacto complainant to the tune of Rs.30 Lakhs. He further submitted that the petitioner is nothing to do with the crime as alleged by the prosecution.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the finance company and he only collected money directly from the defacto complainant. That apart, the petitioner has already involved three previous cases.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the the petitioner has already involved three previous cases, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

sd/- 20/04/2023 / TRUE COPY / /05/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

rmk TO 1.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SESSIONS COURT POLICE STATION, TRICHY CITY.

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

+1 CC to M/s.LAVANYA.T, Advocate ( SR-6270[I] dated 21/04/2023 )

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.7333 of 2023 Date :20/04/2023 RK/SAR-(26/05/2023) 2P/4C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2