S.Usharani v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 13/12/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V. SIVAGNANAM S.Usharani, .. Petitioner/Accused Rank No.3 in Crl.O.P(MD).No.21274/2023 Gowrisankar .. Petitioner/Accused Rank No.4 in Crl.O.P(MD).No.19657/2023 Vs 1.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police Station, Theni, Theni District.

(Crime No.35/2023)..

... Respondent/Complainant in both cases 2.Anand

...Petitioner/Intervener/Victim

in Crl MP(MD)Nos.16904 & 16163/2023 3.Dinesh Kumar

...Petitioner/Intervener/Victim

in Crl MP(MD)No.16163 of 2023 4.Karthikeyan

...Petitioners/Intervener/Victim

in Crl MP(MD)No.16904 of 2023 1/5

For Petitioner :Mr. D. Rajaboopathy, (in Crl.O.P(MD).No.21274/2023) Advocate.

For Petitioner : Mr.Arun.B, (in Crl.O.P(MD).No.19657/2023) Advocate For Respondent : Mr.R.Sureshkumar, in both cases Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervener : Mr.R.Gandhi, Senior Counsel in both Cases for M/s.Gandhi Associates PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.35/2023 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners /accused, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 417, 468, 471, 420 and 120(b) IPC in Crime No.35 of 2023, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution that the accused persons have received a sum of Rs.72,25,000/- from the defacto complainant for getting job as Assistant Engineer in a PWD Department, later, they neither secured job nor returned the money, when the defacto complainant questioned the same, the accused persons threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the case.

2/5

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are working under one Chandra Sekar. Admittedly, the petitioners account has been used by the said Chandrasekar and the amount has been presented through the petitioner's account and the petitioners being innocent their names have been falsely implicated in this case.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant would submit that the amount has been paid through the account of the petitioners and the petitioners also participated in the crime and hence, objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioners also participated in the crime and the amount involved in this offence is very huge and hence, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is necessary and prays for dismissal of these petitions.

6. On perusal of the records it is seen that it is not in dispute that the petitioners account has been used for collecting money. Further, the Bank statement filed by the 3/5

petitioners proved that there was a money transaction through the petitioners account. In such circumstances, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required. I find no merit in this petition and accordingly, these Criminal Original Petitions are dismissed.

sd/- 13/12/2023 / TRUE COPY / /01/2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( CS-I/ II/ III/ IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

trp TO 1.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police Station, Theni, Theni District.

2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.21274 of 2023 Date :13/12/2023 RK/ DD(18/01/2024) 5P / 3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 5/5