The Court dismissed a Criminal Original Petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. filed by an accused charged with cheating and fraud. Considering the huge amount involved and the gravity of the offence, the Court refused bail.
The petition for anticipatory bail was dismissed; the order must be executed by all concerned.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Tuesday, the Twenty Eighth day of September Two Thousand Twenty One
PRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI
CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.17722 of 2021
SARITHA
[ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]
Vs
THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VEPPUR POLICE STATION, CUDDALORE DISTRICT CRIME NO.426 OF 2021
For Petitioner : M/S.M.SOUNDAR VIJAY ARUL RAM Advocate
For Respondent : MR.C.E.PRATAP, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)
PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-
The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 419 and 420 of I.P.C. in Cr.No.426 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with the other accused is alleged to have received a sum of Rs.10,95,400/from the defacto complainant for supply of ultra tech cement, however, they neither supplied the cement nor repaid the amount.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and seeks the permission of this Court to withdraw this petition.
4.Heard the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate.
5.Considering the huge amount involved in the case and the gravity of the offence committed by the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6.This criminal original petition is accordingly dismissed.
-sd/-
28/09/2021
This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned
TRUE COPY
Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO
1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VEPPUR POLICE STATION, CUDDALORE DISTRICT
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
CC to M/S.M.SOUNDAR VIJAY ARUL RAM Advocate on payment of necessary charges
CRL OP.17722/2021
Date :28/09/2021
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused under Section 438 Cr.P.C. facing charges for cheating and fraud.
Whether the huge amount involved and gravity of the offence justify refusal of anticipatory bail.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Saritha
The Inspector of Police Veppur Police Station
M. Dhandapani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
