MURUGAN Vs. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner/Sole Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 17/2/2024 for the offence punishable under Sec. 420 I.P.C. in Crime No.44 of 2024, seeks bail.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that in the year 2012, the grandfather of the defacto complainant has given a sum of Rs.68,000.00 to the petitioner, who is the goldsmith, for making gold chain, however, the petitioner neither gave the gold chain nor returned the amount to the grandfather of the defacto complainant. Since the grandfather of the defacto complainant died in the year 2012, the complaint has been made by the defacto complainant.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the transaction between the petitioner and the grandfater of the defacto complainant took place in the year 2012, but, the defacto complainant has made a complaint in the year 2024. The respondent Police, without verifying the same, has registered the complaint against the petitioner and remanded him into judicial custody on 17/2/2024. Hence, he prays for bail.