Petitioner sought anticipatory bail in an economic offence FIR alleging she induced a complainant to invest Rs.2,39,000 in GDR Enterprises without repayment. Citing gravity of offences, large sums involved and incomplete investigation, the judge declined bail and dismissed the petition.
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.
Crl. O.P. No.18523 of 2024
Crl. O.P. No.18523 / of 2024
P. DHANABAL.J.,
The petitioner / Accused, who apprehends arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 120-B of IPC and Section 5 of TNPID Act in connection with the Cr. No.4 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.
complainant were known to each other through one Nagu @ Rajeswari, that the petitioner induced the defacto complainant to invest money in her GDR Enterprises and believing the same, the defacto complainant invested money to the tune of Rs.2,39,000/- for getting more profits, but the defacto complainant has not got more profits as promised by the accused and also did not get back her amount invested with the accused company, thereby, the petitiner cheated the defacto complainant. Hence the case.
1 of 5
Crl. O.P. No.18523 of 2024
the said company, that due to COVID-19, the said company sustained huge loss, thereby, they were not able to repay the investors and hence the investors gave complaint, that A1 was arrested and released on statutory bail, that the petitioner is no way connected with the above said GDR Enterprises, that she is the wife of A1's brother, that she was only an employee in the said company, that she is an innocent, that the earlier applications for anticipatory bail were dismissed and hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Crl. O.P. No.18523 of 2024
Tiruvotriyur Police Station in Cr. No.5439 of 2020 under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC against the petitioner and other accused, that thereafter several complaints were received and hence the case was transferred to the Economic Offence Wing and the FIR was registered on the file of Economic Offence Wing in Cr. No.4 of 2022 under Sections 406, 409, 420, 120-B and Section 5 of TNPID Act and statements of witnesses have also been recorded and documents have been collected, which reveal that all the accused have conspired together and cheated the investors, that investigation is not yet completed and custodial interrogation is required
and hence strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
3 of 5
Crl. O.P. No.18523 of 2024
27.09.2024
mjs
To
P.DHANABAL,J mjs
4 of 5
Crl. O.P. No.18523 of 2024
CRL O.P. No.18523 of 2024
27.09.2024
5 of 5
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to A3 in a deposit-cheating case under IPC and TNPID Act where investigation is pending.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
P. Dhanabal
P. Dhanabal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
