M.Karuppu @ Karuppasamy v. The Inspector Of Police

CRL OP(MD). No.16909 of 2022 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 21/09/2022 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice A.A.NAKKIRAN CRL OP(MD). No.16909 of 2022 M.Karuppu @ Karuppasamy ... Petitioner/A2 Vs The State rep.by The Inspector of Police, Thiruthangal Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

Crime No.264 of 2022.

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.SATISH.G.R., Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.M.MUTHUMANIKKAM, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 264 of 2022 on the file of the respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 4 and 9 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2003, r/w. 306 IPC in Crime No.264 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seek/s anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the defacto complainant borrowed a sum of Rs.95,000/- with interest from the petitioner through her younger son viz., Prakashraj. Apart from that, they had also borrowed money from A1, A3 and A4 respectively. Since the defacto complainant and her son did not repay the amount, the accused were started to torture them by demanding exorbitant interest and hence, the said Prakashraj committed suicide on 15.09.2022. Hence, the complaint.

3. The leaned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and his name has been falsely implicated in this case.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/2

CRL OP(MD). No.16909 of 2022

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner and other accused demanded exorbitant rate of interest at the rate of 7% to 10% from the defacto complainant and his family members. He would further submit that due to continuous torture by the petitioner and other accused, for repayment of amount the son of the defacto complainant committed suicide and the co-accused viz., A1 and A3 are also still in custody and hence, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary and strongly, opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.Considering the serious nature of offence committed by the petitioner and also submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 21/09/2022 / TRUE COPY / /09/2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUTHANGAL POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

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

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.16909 of 2022 Date :21/09/2022 TRP SA/GB/SAR.1/30.09.2022/2P/3C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2