M.Pandiyan v. The Inspector Of Police
CRL OP(MD). No.18979 of 2022 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 14/03/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP(MD). No.18979 of 2022 M.Pandiyan ... Petitioner / Accused No.3 Vs 1.State rep by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police Station, Trichy District (Crime No.18 of 2022).
... 1st Respondent / Complainant 2.Vanitha ... 2nd Respondent / Intervener / Defacto Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.Karthick Kumar A, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi, Additional Public Prosecutor For Intervenor : Mr.S.Ramasamy PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.18 of 2022 on the file of the respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/A3 who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 506(i) of I.P.C., in Crime No.18 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/A3 is the father of A1. The first accused is a student of the defacto complainant and he has stated that he is having highly influenced person in the Government Department and with the help of them he will get Government job within 6 months. For which, he demanded Rs.25,00,000/- from the defacto complainant and she had paid https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/2
CRL OP(MD). No.18979 of 2022 Rs.22,00,000/-. However, the first accused, without getting the Government job to the defacto complainant, further demanded a sum of Rs.3,00,000/-. After knowing the fraudulent act of A1, the defacto complainant went to the petitioner's home and asked the petitioner to repay the said amount. At that time, A1 had threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint. 3.Heard. Perused the materials available on record including the First Information Report.
4.There are three accused in this case. The petitioner is arrayed as A3. It is a case of job racketing. The petitioner, his wife and son had collected a sum of Rs.22,00,000/- from the de-facto complainant in order to get Government job. Thereafter, they have failed to get any job and refused to return the amount. Therefore, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much necessary in this case. That apart, this is the second application for anticipatory bail and the earlier application for anticipatory bail in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.17765 of 2022 was dismissed by this Court dated 06.10.2022.
5.Taking into consideration the fact that there is no change in circumstances, since the dismissal of the earlier petition, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Hence, this petition is dismissed.
sd/- 14/03/2023 / TRUE COPY / /03/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
SJI To 1.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police Station, Trichy District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.18979 of 2022 Date :14/03/2023 ED/MMS/SAR-3 (23/03/2023) 2P 3C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2