Maria Edwin Jose v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 25/11/2024 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice N.ANAND VENKATESH Maria Edwin Jose ... Petitioner/2nd Accused Vs The Inspector of Police, Thuckalay Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

(Crime No.576 of 2024) ... Respondent/defacto Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.S.Jebastin For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.576 of 2024 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/2nd accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 406 and 420 IPC in Crime No.576 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/4

2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant and the second accused are neighbors and they are known to each other. The wife of the defacto complainant is the professor in a private College at Nagercoil. The first accused befriended the defacto complainant and promised to arrange a reputed job to the wife of the defacto complainant in a Government College. Believing the same, the defacto complainant is said to have given a sum of Rs.35 lakhs to the first accused, after pledging the jewels. Thereafter, the accused persons cheated the defacto complainant.

3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent Police. 4.There are totally two accused persons in this case and the petitioner has been arrayed as second accused.

5.When the matter came up for hearing on 11.11.2024, this Court passed the following order:

"The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even before registration of FIR, a detailed enquiry was conducted by the respondent Police and the petitioner has submitted all the relevant documents at the time of enquiry. 2.Additional typed set of papers also filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner today.

2/4

3.The learned petitioner's counsel is directed to serve the copy to the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side).

4.Post the matter on 25.11.2024.

5.In the meantime, the respondent Police shall not arrest the petitioner." 6.Pursuant to the above order, the matter was listed for hearing today. 7.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent confirmed the fact the petitioner was called for enquiry and the statement was also recorded. That apart, in the course of investigation, a sum of Rs.20,50,000/- has been recovered and 43.500 grams of gold was also recovered. The learned Government Advocate further submitted that on investigation, it was found that the petitioner (A2) was not involved in the crime.

8.In the light of the above submissions, there is no apprehension of arrest for the petitioner. Recording the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), this petition is disposed of.

sd/- 25/11/2024 / TRUE COPY / /12/2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

3/4

TA TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THUCKALAY POLICE STATION, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.19104 of 2024 Date :25/11/2024 SS/GSV/SAR- /03/12/2024/ 4P/3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4