Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.KUMARAPPAN, J
Sangeetha Surulirajan – Appellant
Versus
State rep. By The Inspector of Police, CBCID Police, Puducherry. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners seek anticipatory bail. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. opposition by respondent and intervenor. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's consideration of bail implications. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. court's decision on bail applications. (Para 8 , 9) |
ORDER
The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections
318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No.1 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police and seek anticipatory bail.
2. The allegation against the petitioners is that they, along with the other accused, induced the defacto complainant and cheated a sum of Rs.4,53,23,658/-. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are tenants under the defacto complainant and that, upon the request of the defacto complainant, they had assisted him in making certain investments. According to the learned counsel, what transpired between the petitioners and the defacto complainant is only a business transaction. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The said contention was strongly opposed by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent, who submitted that
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
