Krishnakumar Menon v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 17.11.2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble MR JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM 1.Krishnakumar Menon 2.K.Chithiraleka Menon ... Petitioners/Accused Rank Not Known Vs The Inspector of Police, Economic Offence Wing, Madurai District.
(Crime No.5 of 2023) ... Respondent/Complainant B.R.Kannan ... Intervener Petitioner/Defacto Complainant In Crl.MP(MD).13902/2023 in Crl.OP(MD).16873/2023 V.J.Rajasekarran ... Petitioner/Intervener/De-facto Complainant No. 10 In Crl.MP(MD).14459/2023 in Crl.OP(MD).16873/2023 For Petitioners : Mrs.PRABHA, Advocate for M/s.GEORGE PAUL ANTO, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.R.SURESH KUMAR, Government Advocate(Crl.side) For Intervenor : Mr.R.SENTHIL KUMAR, Advocate In Crl.MP(MD).13902/2023 For Intervenor : Mr.S.PALANIVELAYUTHAM, Advocate In Crl.MP(MD).14459/2023 1/4
PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.5 of 2023 on the file of the Respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 r/w 34 IPC and Section 5 of TNPID Act, 1997 in Crime No.5 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons were running a company in the name and style of M.M.S.Health Care Technologies Pvt.Ltd., and the said company has its branch at Madurai. The said company involved in the medical equipment manufacturing and selling the same in the international markets and thereby, accruing huge profit from the said business. The said company has its sister concern namely Maestros Mediline Systems Limited Company.
The accused persons induced the defacto complainant and others to deposit money in the said company and they were also made to believe that they would give depositors a share in the profit gained from their business. Hence, the defacto complainant and others invested huge amount in the said company. Thereafter, they failed to give share as promised by them. Hence, the case.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the 2/4
petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail. 4.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that the petitioners herein are Directors of the above said company and they are the responsible for the amount received from the general public. Hence, he strongly objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5.On perusal of records, it is noticed that the company called M.M.S.Health Care Technologies Pvt.Ltd., collected huge amount from the general public to invest the same in manufacturing medical equipment and they promised to give huge share to the depositors. After receiving huge amount, they failed to give share as they promised.
It is also noticed that the petitioners herein, being Directors of the company, are responsible for the amount collected from the general public and hence, their custodial interrogation is very much required in this case. 6.In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. sd/- 17/11/2023 / TRUE COPY / /12/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S. ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
3/4
GNS TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ECONOMIC OFFENCE WING, MADURAI DISTRICT.
2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1 CC to M/s.S.PALANI VELAYUTHAM, Advocate ( SR-16471[I] dated 17/11/2023 ) +1 CC to M/s.L.GEORGE PAUL ANTO, Advocate ( SR-16479[I] dated 20/11/2023 ) ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.16873 of 2023 Date :17/11/2023 SA/JGB/SAR. /26.12.2023/4P/5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023. 4/4