Rajkumar, v. The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Eleventh day of January Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.NIRMAL KUMAR CRL OP(MD) No.21201 of 2018 RAJKUMAR ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.2 Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CCB, TIRUNELVELI CITY POLICE STATION, (IN CRIME.NO.10/2018) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : Mr.S.SIVASUBRAMANIAN Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.SUYAMBULINGA BHARATHI Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) 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 alleged offences punishable under Sections 417, 418, 420 and 120(b) IPC, in Crime No.10 of 2018, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that in the year 2014, the first accused, namely, Ramasamy availed loan for a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- from the defacto complainant bank by perusing all relevant documents from the bank panel valuer and panel advocate and the loan become default. The petitioner herein only introduced the borrower to the bank. The bank has revalued the property by their panel valuer, wherein it was found that the secured asset is overvalued by the previous panel property valuer. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the main accused in this case is the first accused, who has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court and for the default of the loan, the bank has proceeded against the properties of the first accused and D.R.T., proceedings are pending. Hence, he prayed for anticipatory bail.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent police would submit that the petitioner has involved in Crime Nos.13 of 2016, 08 of 2017, 09 of 2018, 10 of 2018 and 11 of 2018 and all https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

these cases are similar in nature and the custodian interrogation is important in this case.

5.On perusal of the First Information Report, if is found that there is a mentioning about the Crime No.13 of 2016, wherein the amount of Rs.1,50,00,000/- has been cheated by the accused persons. The petitioner is indulging in offence of similar nature. 6.Considering the same, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

sd/- 11/01/2019 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CCB, TIRUNELVELI CITY POLICE STATION.

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

PS/JC/SAR-4/23.01.2019/2P/3C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.21201 of 2018 Date :11/01/2019 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/