BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Fifth day of August Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.10367 of 2011 K.SAKTHIVEL ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED 3 Vs STATE REP BY:: THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CITY CRIME BRANCH, MADURAI CITY CR.NO. 57/2011 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. A.ANANTHAPADMABAN Advocate For Respondent : MR. A. RAMAR, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner is arrayed as A3 and he was arrested on 24.07.2011 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 448, 387, 506(i) and 120(b) I.P.C. in Crime No.57 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks bail. 2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is working as Engineer in Agricultural Department and he is nothing to do with the commission of offence. He would further submit that the alleged occurrence has been taken place between 2008 and 2011 and the complaint has been given only on 23.07.2011 and the petitioner was arrested on 24.07.2011 and remanded to judicial custody. He would further submit that the property is belonging to A1 and the sister's daughter of the petitioner has entered into a sale agreement with the lawful owner of the property i.e. A1 and Rs.13 lakhs has been paid as advance in the month of June 2010. He would further submit that the owner is residing at Ethiopia and he executed a power of attorney on 22.04.2009 in favour of one Jeganathan, who is the defacto complainant and the same was cancelled on 29.04.2009 and on the date itself, the defacto complainant has executed the sale deed in favour of his wife. He would further submit that A1 has entered into a sale agreement with one Packialakshmi and he received a sum of Rs.13 lakhs as advance and on payment of the amount, he handed over the possession to the said Packialakshmi. He would further submit that the allegations made in the F.I.R. is that one person had met the defacto complainant and introduced himself as he is Sakthivel and he has intimated that Shyamsundar/A1 was in his custody and except this averment, no allegation made against A3, the present petitioner herein and the investigation is considerably over and hence, he prayed for the enlargement on bail. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the properties are owned by A1/Shaymsundar and he executed a power of attorney in favour of the defacto complainant, in turn, he sold the same in favour of his wife and now they are in possession and enjoyment of the same. He would further submit that A2 intended to grab the property with the aid of A3 and Packialakshmi and hence, he created such sale agreement and the investigation is in earlier stage and hence, he prayed for the dismissal of the application. 4.Considering the submissions made on either side, admittedly, the case has been registered against 4 named persons and some unnamed persons. The complaint has been given by one Jagadeesan. This petitioner is shown as A3. Perusal of the complaint, it was stated that the property is originally belonging to A1/Shyamsundar, who is none other that the cousin of the defacto complainant and he was holding a firm in the name of Satha Sai Farms in Uganda and he is having Sathya Sai Farms (E) Pvt. Ltd., Company in Ethiopia . Since he suffers some losses, he demanded loan and borrowed Rs. 5 lakhs in the month of April 2008. Since no one is willing to purchase the property, because it was situated in 'Muttu Chandhu', his wife is willing to purchase the same. When he made arrangement, he came to know that the power of attorney has been cancelled. When he was about to gave a complaint, then, he executed another power of attorney dated 22.04.2009, in pursuance of the same, he sold the same to his wife for Rs.21 lakhs. totally, he has paid Rs.72,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 18%, which amounts to Rs.81,79,500/-. Hence, he the balance amount to be payable to the defacto complainant is Rs.60,79,500/-. He further came to know that he was not discharged the housing loan to the tune of Rs.8 lakhs and hence, he gave a complaint dated 19.09.2009, which was pending. 5.There is series of complaints between A1 and the defacto complainant. The present complaint has been given on 23.07.2011. In that, it was specifically mentioned that in the month of June 2010, when he gone to K.K.Nagar house along with his friend to meet A1/Shyamsundar, but, he was not there and at that time, two persons were chatting in front of the house and one of them introduced himself that he is Purushothaman, Advocate and when he made enquiry about A1/Shyamsundar, he would state that Shyamsundar was in the custody of one Sakthivel. He would further state that one week later, 5 persons were came to the office at Ramapuram, Kovai and one of them introduced himself that he is Sakthivel and Shyansundar was in his custody and Shyamsundar handed over the K.K.Nagar house to him. He demanded the defacto complainant to execute the sale deed after receipt of Rs.20 lakhs. 6.While perusing the averments, the defacto complainant stated that the person claiming him as Sakthivel and threatened him as Shyamsundar was in his custody. Except this averment, nothing against this petitioner. 7.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the petitioner was arrested on 24.07.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ and he is in custody for more than 30 days and the investigation is considerably over and all the facts are borne by records, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 8. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his 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 learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai, and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the Court concerned daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. sd/- 25/08/2011 / 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 ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT MADURAI 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CITY CRIME BRANCH, MADURAI CITY 5 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL PRISON, MADURAI 1. CC to M/S. A.ANANTHAPADMABAN Advocate SR.No.28965: DM::2011:AUGUST:25:: ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.10367 of 2011 Date :25/08/2011 3C::7C:: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/