Sivamurugan M v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 19/07/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN Sivamurugan M, ... Petitioner/Accused No.1 Vs State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, Theni Police Station, Crime No 279 of 2023, Theni District.
... Respondent/Complainant M.Gnanasekaran ....Intervening Petitioner/Proposed 2nd Respondent in Crl MP(MD)No. 10340 of 2023 For Petitioner : M/s.Senthil Kumar.J.,Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambiselvan, Additional Public Prosecutor For Intervenor : Mr.C.Jeganathan, Advocate.
in Crl MP(MD)No. 10340 of 2023 PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.279 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police. 1/4
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused No.1, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 406, 407, 408, 420, 294(b), 506(i) of I.P.C, in Crime No.279 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The defacto complainant lodged a complaint stating that he is running a shop called 'J.Rhithika Enterprises'. During the audit, it was found that Rs.11.42 lakhs and some was found cheated. On further enquiry, it was found that this petitioner alleged to have forged the documents and bills and mis-appropriated the above said amount.
3.The counsel for the intervenor has come forward and stated that that the above said mis-appropriation has been committed in novel way. They alleged to have created documents as if they have supplied the articles to one Kumar and Srivaari. Actually, the above said articles were not supplied. The amount has been misappropriated by the petitioner. To evidence the above said, there was a conversation with the petitioner and second accused through mobile phone. 2/4
4.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that absolutely, no document has been collected during the course of enquiry to implicate this petitioner. Only one document in the form of bill has been produced. Even though the audio conversation has not been verified so far. 5.Considering the fact that actually Rs.11.42 lakhs has been misappropriated in a novel way, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. sd/- 19/07/2023 / TRUE COPY / 02/08/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TM TO THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THENI POLICE STATION THENI DISTRICT 3/4
THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.12340 of 2023 Date :19/07/2023 PKP/MR/SAR- /02.08.2023/ 4P/3 C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4