Nirmala Rani v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 29/08/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice P. DHANABAL Nirmala Rani ... Petitioner/Accused No.5 Vs State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Karur.

Crime No.24 of 2022.

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner :

M/s Gokul Raj.S, Advocate For Respondent :

Mr.S.Ravi, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.24 of 2022 on the file of the respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of I.P.C, in Crime No.24 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

1/4

2.The case of the prosecution is that the accused had received a sum of Rs.20,20,000/- from various persons and assured them to arrange Government Job and thereafter, they cheated them and also refused to return the said amount. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner and her husband are running a matrimonial centre at Karur, for arranging marriage in the locality. The first accused had approached the petitioner's husband as if she was deserted by her husband and got divorce. Further, she requested the petitioner's husband to arrange the second marriage. In the meantime, the first accused had requested to give details of the bank account of the petitioner's husband stating the friends of the first accused would deposit the amount for marriage. Believing the words, the petitioner's husband had given his account number and after some time, the amount deposited by other persons was withdrawn by the petitioner's husband and handed over to the first accused. He would further submit that petitioner's husband was already enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the order of this Court. Hence, she may be granted anticipatory bail.

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police would submit that the petitioner is arrayed as A5 in this case. It is a clear case of job racketing and the accused persons cheated the fourteen persons to the tune of 2/4

Rs.20,20,000/-. He would further submit that investigation in this case is not yet completed. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.

6.In this case, though co-accused has already been enlarged on anticipatory bail, considering the rival submissions made on either side and considering the nature of gravity of offence charged against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail at this stage. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

sd/- 29/08/2023 / TRUE COPY / /09/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

PNM TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, KARUR. 2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

3/4

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.15661 of 2023 Date :29/08/2023 RS/DD/SAR-(04.09.2023) 4P 3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4