K.Shanmugavel v. The Sub Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Fourth day of September Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP(MD) No.14680 of 2018 K.SHANMUGAVEL ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.1 Vs STATE REP BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUVERAMBUR POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT CR NO.149 OF 2017 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.K.APPADURAI Advocate For Respondent : MR.V.NEELAKANDAN, ADDL. 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 offences punishable under Sections 120(b), 294(b), 406, 420 and 506(i) I.P.C, in Crime No.149 of 2017, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused in this case were jointly employed as agents by 4th accused, namely Sankara Rav Pattel, who is said to be owner of an Irudiyam Factory at Gujarat and for the purpose of investment in the said factory, the said Sankara Rav Pattel promised to pay remuneration. On such promise of A4, the petitioner and other accused worked as its agents for arranging investors. Due to that, the petitioner and other accused canvassed and contacted the persons for investment. Thereafter, the investors money have been misappropriated. Hence, the case has been registered.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent. He has been engaged as one of the agents by A4 for his company at Gujarath for canvassing and

arranging for investors. The petitioner has bonafidely canvassed for the business of A4 Company. In fact, the 4th accused defrauded and deceived the petitioner without any remuneration. He further submitted that the petitioner has not misappropriated any money and whatever investment made by the investor was only Bank transaction between the complainant and the 4th accused company. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent submitted that investigation is pending. 5.Taking note of the facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. The petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- (Rupees three lakhs and fifty thousand only) to the credit of Crime No.

149 of 2017 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Tiruchirappalli and on such deposit, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Tiruchirappalli and on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the conditions stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

6.The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed.

sd/- 04/09/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.VI, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI.

DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI.

3 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUVERAMBUR POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT 4 THE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S.K.APPADURAI Advocate SR.No.16809

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.14680 of 2018 Date :04/09/2018 TR/JC/SAR-1 (10/09/2018) 3P/6C