1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Fourth day of October Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice C.S.KARNAN CRL OP(MD) No.11686 of 2011 KOPPAMPATTI TAMIZH MARAN ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.11 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CITY CRIME BRANCH TIRUCHIRPPALLI CR.NO.24/2011 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : MR. S.ASHOK KUMAR, Senior counsel for M/S. K.JEGANATHAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.RAMAR, Addl.Public Prosecutor ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 147, 447, 363, 342, 325, 387, 506(ii), 392 r/w 120 B and 307 I.P.C., in Crime No.24 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that this petitioner and other accused have forcibly got sale agreement from the defacto complainant in the month of April 2007 by paying an advance a sum of Rs.40 lakhs and later it was robbed by the petitioner and other accused. Subsequently, on 07.09.2007, the petitioner and other accused forcibly made the defacto complainant and his wife to execute a registered sale deed in favour of their political party without paying balance sale consideration. 3. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the property was purchased from the defacto complainant for the use of political party and not for the personal use of any of the accused and the entire sale consideration was paid as stated in the sale deed and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 the defacto complainant has also paid income tax for the sale consideration received by him. He further submitted that he has nothing to do with alleged commission of offence and due to change in the political atmosphere, the present complaint has been given against the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner will not abscond or evade any due process of law and he never tamper with the witnesses and hence, he has come forwarded with this application for bail. 4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the defacto complainant is a practising Doctor and he purchased a land near Chathiram Bus Stand, Trichy for construction of Hospital on 07.08.2006. He further submitted that in that place, the accused put up a tent for running an exhibition, that was questioned by the defacto complainant and hence, the accused have threatened and abducted the defacto complainant to A1's office, where the defacto complainant signed the document under life thread. He further submitted that there is danger to the life of the defacto complainant and his family members and hence, he prays for dismissal of this application. 5. In view of the facts and circumstances of this case and arguments advanced by the learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the considered opinion that the alleged occurrence has taken place in the month of April 2007, however, the F.I.R. lodged against the petitioner in the month of August 2011 as such there is a inordinate delay for registering the case against the petitioner and hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Trichy and on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of one week. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 7. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed. sd/- 04/10/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, TRICHY. 2 DO-THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TRICHY. 3 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, MADURAI. 4 DO-THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI. 5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CITY CRIME BRANCH, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI. 6 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1 CC to M/S. K.JEGANATHAN Advocate SR.No.34677 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.11686 of 2011 Date :04/10/2011 PA/04.10.2011/3P/8C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/