Dismissed

Haridass v. the State Rep.by

Madras HC7 Dec 2021CRL OP/23585/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed a petition for anticipatory bail filed by an accusedperson apprehending arrest for cheating and causing suicide. The court held that the serious nature of the offence, the large amount involved, and the ongoing investigation justified denying bail.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application dismissed; the petitioner is not granted anticipatory bail.

Haridass Vs the State Rep.by — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Tuesday, the Seventh day of December Two Thousand Twenty One

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶6

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.23585 of 2021

¶7

HARIDASS [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]

¶8

¶9

THE STATE REP.BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHOOLAIMEDU POLICE STATION, CHENNAI. CR.NO.688 OF 2021.

¶10

For Petitioner : M/S.V.INIYAVAN Advocate

¶11

For Respondent : MR.N.S.SUGANTHAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶12

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

¶13

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶14

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 420, 408 and 306 of IPC in Crime No.688 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶15

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused persons had collected a sum of Rs.21,00,000/- from the deceased for the purpose of secure job. Thereafter, the petitioner along with other accused persons neither secured job nor returned the money, due to which, the deceased had committed suicide by pouring krishna oil in his body and run away the lift and outside the road and died. Hence, the complaint.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that co-accused had already been released on bail. He further submitted that the petitioner is the relative of the deceased, he introduced one Palanikumar and the petitioner's name was not found in the FIR. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶18

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the petitioner along with other accused persons had collected a sum of Rs.21,00,000/- from the deceased for the purpose of secure job. Thereafter, the petitioner along with other accused persons neither secured job nor returned the money, due to which, the deceased had committed suicide by pouring krishnaoil in his body and run away the lift and outside the road and died. He further submitted that the investigation is at initial stage. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶19

Considering the fact that large amounts of money is involved and that the petitioner has cheated under the guise of job racket and also taking into consideration the fact that investigation is still going on, enlarging the petitioner on anticipatory bail at this point of time, when the offence is serious in nature and there is likelihood of the petitioner indulging in activities which would be prejudicial for investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶20

Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

¶21

-sd/-

¶22

07/12/2021

¶23

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned

¶24

TRUE COPY

¶25

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104. TO

¶26

1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHOOLAIMEDU POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

¶27

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶28

CC to M/S.V.INIYAVAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges

CRL OP.23585/2021

Date :07/12/2021

TA-27/12/2021

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Haridass v. the State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haridass v. the State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Poomani Vs State Rep by

Sathishkumar @ Sathish Vs State Rep.by

R.Ramesh Vs the State Rep by

Guna Sekar Vs State Rep by

K.Ashokan Vs State Rep by

Srikanth Vs State Rep.by