R.Suryapandi v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 26/10/2021 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice B.PUGALENDHI 1.R.Suryapandi 2.Ravi @ Ravi Kumar ... Petitioners/proposed Accused Vs State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Superintendent of Police Office, Ramanathapuram.

(Crime No. Not Known of 2021) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.S.Sivaprakash Advocate For Respondent : Mr.T.Senthilkumar, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.Not known of 2021 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent Police, for the offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC in Crime No.Not known of 2021, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners are father and son. They have received a sum of Rs.3,20,000/- from the defacto complainant by assuring that they would arrange a job in the Forest Department.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are father and son. The second petitioner's wife was suffering from cancer and for her medical expenses, the petitioners made a request to the defacto complainant and borrowed a sum of Rs.1,60,000/- as a loan. But, the defacto complainant has projected the case as if the petitioners received a sum of Rs.3,20,000/- for obtaining job for one Rajkumar and Vinayagamoorthi. He further submits that the father-in-law of the defacto complainant is working as Sub-Inspector of Police in the respondent Police and therefore, 1/3

this case has been registered as if it is a case of job racketing.

4. Considering the submissions made, the respondent Police was directed to file a report before this Court and produce the CD file. The matter was also adjourned to 22.10.2021.

5. When the matter was taken up for consideration on 22.10.2021, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed a report of the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Ramanathapuram, wherein, it is stated that the defacto complainant paid a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as cash and Rs.2,20,000/- through Bank for the purpose of obtaining job.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has also produced the bank details that in the month of December 2018, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- was transferred with an endorsement "INB Forest Exam" and Rs.60,000/- was also transferred with an endorsement "INB MBS Rajkumar" in the month of January 2019.

7. Considering the said submissions, this Court was not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. However, there was no representation for the petitioners and therefore, the case was directed to be listed today under the caption "For Dismissal". Even today, there is no representation for the petitioners.

8. Being satisfied with the report filed by the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Ramanathapuram that the money has been transferred only for the purpose of securing job, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

9. In the result, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 26/10/2021 / TRUE COPY / / /2021 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

2/3

TO 1.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Superintendent of Police Office, Ramanathapuram.

2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.12012 of 2021 Date :26/10/2021 RS/PN/SAR1 (11.11.2021) 3P 3C 3/3