Bastin Jesuraj v. The Inspector Of Police

CRL OP(MD). No.10547 of 2022 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 14/07/2022 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN CRL OP(MD). No.10547 of 2022 Bastin Jesuraj.

... Petitioner/Accused No.2 Vs State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Theni District.

Cr.No.14/2021.

... Respondent/Complainant Leeliananthi, ....Intervening Petitioner/ Proposed Respondent/Defacto Complainant in Crl.MP(MD)No. 7666 of 2022 For Petitioner : Mr.G.Rameshkumar, Advocate For Intervener : Mr.R.L.Dhilipan Pandian,Advocate in Crl MP(MD)No. 7666 of 2022 For Respondent : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor (crl.side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.14/2021 on the file of the respondent police ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 420, 506(i), 120(B) IPC, in Crime No.14 of 2021 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons promised to provide job in the college proposed to be started by them. They have collected money from various persons, including the defacto complainant and cheated to the tune of Rs.1.24 Crores. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/2

CRL OP(MD). No.10547 of 2022 3.This is the third anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner. The earlier petitions were dismissed by this Court observing that huge amount was cheated by the accused persons, not only from the defacto complainant, but also from several other persons. The earlier matters were heard by me and I made a suggestion to the learned counsel for the petitioner to explore the possibility of settlement. However, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the matter could not be settled. The opportunity given by this Court was not properly utilized by the petitioner. Considering the prima facie materials against the petitioner, anticipatory bail petitions were dismissed by this Court.

5.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the coaccused, ie., A1 was already remanded and released on bail and there was no condition to return the money. The investigation is pending for the past eight months and it will be completed. Therefore, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary. Hence, prays to release him on anticipatory bail.

6.There is no change of circumstance exhibited by the learned counsel for the petitioner. In the earlier order itself this Court clearly stated that the petitioner is not entitled for any consideration or any discretionary relief. Considering the above facts, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is not entitled for anticipatory bail.

7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

sd/- 14/07/2022 / TRUE COPY / /07/2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, THENI DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10547 of 2022 Date :14/07/2022 pnm PKP/SVR/SAR-2/25.07.2022/2P/3C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2