In a bail petition under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, the High Court granted interim bail to the petitioner, an Army OVP accused of cheating, to facilitate repayment of Rs.25 lakh to the complainant until April 4, 2016.
Petitioner granted interim bail till 04.04.2016 on bond of Rs.10,000 with one surety and condition to report daily.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
Crl.O.P.No.5169 of 2016
K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.
The petitioner, who is arrayed as A-1, was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.02.2016 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 r/w 34 of IPC in Crime No.31 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant had paid Rs.25,00,000/- to the first accused company for taking training as co-pilot and thereafter, he was assured employment in the same company. However, the accused did not keep up their words and thereby cheated the de facto complainant.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely roped as an accused in this case. It is further submitted that as per the assurance, the son of the de facto complainant was sent for training at Gurgaon and the first accused company has paid Rs.18,00,000/- to meet out the expenses. It is also submitted that the first accused application is pending with DGCA and after obtaining Air operation licence only the de facto complainant's son could be employed in the company. It is submitted that without prejudice to the right of the accused in the criminal case, the first accused is ready to repay Rs.25,00,000/- to the de facto complainant.
4. Learned Government Advocate [Criminal Side] appearing for the respondent would submit that both the accused by giving false representation to the de facto complainant, received Rs.25,00,000/- and thereby cheated him.
2
K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.
sri
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant interim bail to the petitioner till 04.04.2016 to enable the petitioner to repay the amount of Rs.25,00,000/- to the de facto complainant.
6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.10,000/- [Rupees Ten Thousand only] with one surety, who must be a close relative for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai and the learned Magistrate shall accept the same surety, which was furnished by the petitioner earlier and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.00a.m. till 04.04.2016.
Post the matter on 04.04.2016 for reporting compliance.
16.03.2016
Note : Issue Order Copy by Today
sri
Crl.O.P.No.5169 of 2016
1 issue framed by the court
Whether interim bail should be granted to the petitioner to enable repayment of the cheated amount.
K. Kalyanasundaram
K. Kalyanasundaram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
