AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P. Dhanabal, J
The petitioner/A2, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 417,468,471,420 and 120(b) of IPC in Crime No.2 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
The case of the prosecution is that the accused person on the false promise of providing job to the defacto complainant has received a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- and thereafter cheated him by giving forged appointment order, hence the case.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that innocent and the main accused is A1 in this case and the petitioner the money which he received from the defacto complainant, anticipatory bail. the petitioner is has returned all hence he seeks anticipatory bail.
The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the accused person on the false promise of providing job to the defacto complainant has received a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- and thereafter cheated him by giving forged appointment order. He would further submit that this petitioner is the main accused and the amount was also received by him, hence he objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Heard both side and perused the materials available on record.
Considering the rival submissions on either side and considering the serious nature of offence and also considering the fact that the investigation is in preliminary stage this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage.
Hence the petition stands dismissed.