BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT (Criminal Jurisdiction) Tuesday, the Eleventh day of October Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S.NAGAMUTHU CRL OP(MD)No.10770 of 2011 RAJAN :PETITIONERS / SOLE ACCUSED -Vs- THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH, MADURAI DISTRICT. CR NO. 59/2010 :RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. K.GOKUL Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.S.DURAIPANDI, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for offences under Sections 409 and 420 IPC, in Crime No.59 of 2010 on the file of the respondent police, the petitioner has come up with this petition seeking anticipatory bail. 2.According to the case of prosecution, the petitioner is an agent working under the de-facto complainant. The de-facto complainant used to supply raw materials to the weavers and the weavers in turn would return the finished goods to the de-facto complainant. As an agent, the petitioner was in-charge of supplying the raw materials on behalf of the de-facto complainant and to get back the finished goods, so as to submit the same to the de-facto complainant. In such a way, he has caused loss to the de-facto complainant to the tune of Rs.2,87,000/-. On this allegation, the present case has been registered. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not committed any fraud upon the de-facto complainant According to him, whatever the quantity of finished goods were returned by the weavers, the petitioner duly deposited the same with the de-facto complainant and he has not committed any offence. 4.I have considered the above submissions. 5.A perusal of the F.I.R., would go to show that these transactions are borne out by records and the allegations made in the complaint are refuted by the accused. As of now, there is no other material to show that any amount was handed over to the de-facto complainant. Thus, I am satisfied that a prima facie case has been made out for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.I, Madurai, on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the respondent police every day at 10.30 a.m., without fail for a period of eight weeks. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C scrupulously. sd/- 11/10/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO:1.The Judicial Magistrate No:I, Madurai. 2.-Do- Thro' The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai. 3.The Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 4.The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Madurai District. RP/14.10.2011/1P/5C. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.10770 of 2011,Date :11/10/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/