BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Tenth day of November Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S.NAGAMUTHU CRL OP(MD) No.13374 of 2011 VEDHA SAMUEL ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, NAGERCOIL, CRIME NO.77/2011 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. R.VIJAYAKUMAR Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.S.DURAI PANDIAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) 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 420, 419, 465, 468 & 471 of I.P.C. in Crime No.77 of 2011 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 de-facto complainant executed a general power of attorney deed on 15.05.2011 in fvaour of the petitioner thereby giving power to him to deal with 8 cents of land comprised in R.S.No.488/4, 22 cents in R.S.No.157/6 and 15 cents in R.S.No.487/2 situated in Kunnathur Village, Kanniyakumari District. However, under three different sale deeds in R.S.No.487/2 and R.S.No.488/4 , the petitioner has sold away 25.15 cents i.e. more than the extent for which power was given. This according to the de-facto complainant , makes out an offence as referred to in paragraph No.1. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would deny all the above allegations. Referring to the typed set of papers filed hy him, he would submit that under three different sale deeds, the petitioner has sold away only 12.65 cents i.e., 5 cents, 5.4 cents and 2.25 cents respectively and the petitioner has not sold away any property of an extent, which is more than the extent for which power was given. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.I have considered the above submissions. 5.A perusal of the three sale deeds filed before this Court would go to show that the petitioner has sold away only 12.65 cents. Thus, the petitioner has made out a prima facie case for anticipatory bail. Having regard to the above said fact, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, but with conditions. 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.II, Kuzhithurai, 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. for a period of four weeks without fail. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously . sd/- 10/11/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II ,KUZHITHURAI 2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT AT NAGERCOIL 3.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, NAGERCOIL, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT +1. CC to M/S. R.VIJAYAKUMAR Advocate SR.No.38881 rl/6c – 12.11.2011 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.13374 of 2011 Date :10/11/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/