J.Vijaya Raghavan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 07.10.2021 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice B.PUGALENDHI CRL OP(MD). No.14944 of 2021 J.Vijaya Raghavan ... Petitioner/Accused (Rank Not Known) Vs The State rep by The Inspector of Police, Amathur Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

Crime No.111 of 2021 ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.R.Anand 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.111 of 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 341, 342, 363, 506(ii), 406, 420 and 397 IPC, in Crime No.111 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant, P.Saravanan resident of Devarkulam near Sivakasi, was running a firm in the name and style of Koin bazaar technologies private limited at Madurai and using krypto currency, the de-facto complainant was doing online business on commission basis. On 13.07.2021 at about 10.15 a.m., when he was proceeding in his car all of a sudden, he was waylaid by a car from which four unknown persons and one identifiable person got down. When the de-facto complainant got down from the car, he was abducted by the accused in his car. The de-facto complainant was taken to a cottage at Courtrallam and

illegally, he was detained there. Further, the accused demanded the de-facto complainant to transfer 30 bit coins into their account through online transaction. As a result of which, they obtained win coin, thousand numbered cash coin worth about Rs.13,00,000/-, a bracelet, chain, ring from the de-facto complainant. It is also alleged that the accused obtained signatures from the de-facto complainant in 8 white sheets. The accused by using the ATM card of the de-facto complainant withdrew Rs.67,000/- from his account. Thereafter, the de-facto complainant was set at liberty by the accused. Thereafter, the de-facto complainant managed to escape from the accused and lodged the complaint on 17.07.2021.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that admittedly it is a business transaction between the petitioner and the de-facto complainant and the amount has also been transferred through bank account. The learned counsel further submits that though the de-facto complainant has taken a plea that he managed to escape from the clutches of the accused on the very same day, i.e., on 13.07.2021, the complaint was lodged after a delay of four days on 17.07.2021. He also further submits that the co-accused have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent Police submits that they have collected the details with regard to the transfer of the money and the investigation is yet to be completed.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner and also the fact that the co-accused have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that:

[a]the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity.

[b]the petitioner shall report before respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.

[c]the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[d]the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e]On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [f]If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

Sd/- 07/10/2021 / TRUE COPY / / /2021 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

kmm 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.

TO

1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

2. DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT AT SRIVILLIPUTHUR.

3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AMATHUR POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.14944 of 2021 Date : 07.10.2021 VB/VR/SAR-I/20.10.2021/3P/5C