Mariappan v. The State Of Tamilnadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 18/11/2024 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice N.ANAND VENKATESH
1. Mariappan
2. Vetrivel Ramji
3. Thangamari ... Petitioners/Accused Rank not known Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar Westt Police Station, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.
(Crime No. 62/2024.) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners :
Mr. Thirupathy. S, Advocate.
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. 62 of 2024 on the file of the Respondent police.
1/4
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 120(b), 420, 409, 465, 468, 471, 294(b) and 506(i) I.P.C, in Crime No.62 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons had cheated nearly 10 persons to the tune of Rs.11,30,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Thirty Thousand only). There are totally ten accused persons in this case and the petitioners have been arrayed as A4, A8 and A9.
3. When the anticipatory bail petition filed by A1 to A3 and A5 came up for hearing in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19360 of 2024, this Court was not inclined to grant anticipatory bail and hence the same was dismissed by order dated 11.11.2024.
4. Insofar as the petitioners are concerned, summons are served on them and they also attended enquiry before the respondent police and their statements were also recorded. Subsequently, the present anticipatory bail petition was filed before this Court.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) on instructions submitted that summons were issued to the petitioners and they attended enquiry and they had undertaken to repay the money.
2/4
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are also victims in this case and they made it very clear even at the time of enquiry.
7. In the considered view of this Court, the respondent police had chosen to call the petitioners for enquiry by issuing summons. This Court did not entertain the anticipatory bail petition filed by the other accused persons. If the petitioners have attended the enquiry and taken a particular stand and the respondent police have not chosen to arrest the petitioners straight away, it can only be construed that there is no apprehension of arrest for the petitioners.
8. In view of the above, the grant of anticipatory bail will only stand in the way of the respondent police from completing the investigation at the earliest point of time. It is left open to the respondent police to proceed further with the enquiry of the petitioners as adumberated under Section 35 of BNSS.
9. This Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of with the above terms. sd/- 18/11/2024 / TRUE COPY / /11/2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.I /II /III /IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
LS 3/4
To 1.The Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar West Police Station, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1 CC to M/s.S.THIRUPATHY, Advocate ( SR-14283[I] dated 20/11/2024 )
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.19843 of 2024 Date :18/11/2024 ED/ /SAR- (23/11/2024) 4P / 4C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4