RAMARATHINAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is A6, and he was charged for the offences under Sections 120-B, 406, 420 IPC and Section 5 of TNPID Act in Crime No.7 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police. The petitioner was arrested on 03.01.2017 and thereafter, he moved a bail application under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., before the Special Court under TNPID Act Cases, Coimbatore and the petitioner was enlarged on bail by the learned Special Judge, by an order dated 07.03.2017, on certain conditions, and one of such condition is that the petitioner shall deposit a cash security of Rs.10 lakhs into the Court with two sureties each for a like sum and those two sureties must be blood relatives of the petitioner. Now, challenging the above condition, the present revision has been filed.

(2.) Mr.N.Ananthapadmanaban, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent Director of the A1 company and entire amount has been collected by A5 and he has no role in collecting the deposits and he is not in a position to deposit Rs.10 lakhs cash sureity as directed by the Court below. Hence, he sought for modification of the above condition.

(3.) Per contra, Mr. R.Ravichandran, learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondent submits that thousands of depositors have been cheated by the petitioner's company and the petitioner is also one of the Directors of the company from the year 2013. Now, he cannot be considered to be innocent, as he was also involved in the collection of deposits.