Venkadesh v. The Inspector Of Police
EFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 21/07/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN 1.Venkadesh @ Venkateshwaran 2.Mohamed Bahath @ Mohammed Fahath ... Petitioners/Accused Nos. 4 & 5 Vs State represented by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Trichy District.
(In Crime No.17 of 2023) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner :
M/s.C.Muthu Saravanan, Advocate For Respondent :
Mr.B.Nambiselvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITIONS FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.17 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners /Accused, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 506(i) and 120B of IPC, in Crime No.17 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant is that he was 1/4
searching for job for his son Kishorekumar. One Murugananthan was known to her. The said Muruganantham approached her for the purpose of securing job for her son and demanded money. On his instructions, the defacto complainant transferred money to the bank account of the co-accused. To the account of one among the coaccused, she transferred Rs.35,000/- apart from that in his wife account also she transferred Rs.1,50,000/-. Later, not only the said Muruganantham and other accused promised to serve job. But they failed to repay the amount. Hence she filed a complaint and the present case came to be registered.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner even as per the instruction of the said Muruganantham, an amount of Rs.35,000/- was transferred to his account and the same was later transferred to the account of the first accused. The issue is only between the defacto complainant and Muruganantham.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that accused No.1 and 3 were arrested and remanded to judicial custody and they are still in prison. Hence he expressed his objection for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. The nature of offences must be viewed very seriously and this petitioners are not entitled for any discretionary relief. 2/4
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 21/07/2023 / TRUE COPY / /08/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
pnn To 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, TRICHY DISTRICT.
2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.13376 of 2023 Date :21/07/2023 PKP/MR/SAR-(09.08.2023) 3P 3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 3/4
4/4