CRL OP(MD)/23578/2013 of S.GNANAVAN Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE on 30 December 2013

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

( Criminal Jurisdiction )Monday, the Thirtieth day of December Two Thousand ThirteenPRESENTThe Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASHCRL OP(MD) No.23578 of 2013

S.GNANAVAN ..PETITIONER/ACCUSED(RANK NOT KNOWN)

Vs.

STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ECONOMIC OFFENCES WING – II,VIRUDHUANGAR DISTRICT.CR. NO. 4/2013...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

For Petitioner : M/S.A.KESAVAN Advocate

For Respondent : Mr.A.P.BALASUBRAMANI, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

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

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-There are totally four accused in this case and the Petitioner hereinis an accused and he is apprehending arrest at the hands of therespondent police for the alleged Commission of offences punishable undersections 406, 420, 120(B) of IPC and Section 5 of the Tamil NaduProtection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act,1997 in Crime No.4 of 2013, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the Petitioner was involved inonline Trading in the name and style of “Avafx Online Trading Company”and the present complaint was lodged against the Petitioner for notreturning the deposited amount with the above said company.

3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that hisdaughter was working as Receptionist in the defacto complainant's companyand she was arrested on account of the above refusal to pay the depositedmoney and the present Petitioner, who is her father apprehends arrestat the hands of the respondent Police since the respondent police isfrequently visiting his house under the guise of enquiry and hence heseeks anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) would submit that thename of the Petitioner is not found in the First Information Registerregistered in this case.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and thelearned Government Advocate(crl. Side) appearing for the State andperused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, thisCourt is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in thehttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/event of arrest or on appearance before the learned Special Judge forSpecial Court for TNPID Act cases, Madurai and on executing a personalbond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned SpecialJudge concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shallreport before the respondent police daily at 11.00 A.M for a period oftwo weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation. Thepetitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438Cr.P.C., scrupulously.

7. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistratewithin a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy madeready failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed.

sd/-

30/12/2013

/ TRUE COPY /

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

TO

1 THE SPECIAL JUDGE FOR SPECIAL COURT FOR TNPID ACT CASES, MADURAI.

2 THE ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,MADURAI.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ECONOMIC OFFENCES WING - II, VIRUDHUANGAR DISTRICT.VIRUDHUANGAR DISTRICT.

+1. CC to M/S.A.KESAVAN Advocate SR.No.64484

ORDER IN

CRL OP(MD) No.23578 of 2013

Date :30/12/2013

PBK 31/12/2013 2P/5C