BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Eighth day of November Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S. TAMILVANAN CRL OP(MD) No.13678 of 2011 M. JEGADESAN ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE NANGUNERI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT, CRIME NO.289/2011 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. S.RAMASAMY 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 :- Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused No.3 as well as the learned Government Advocate(Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent. 2.The petitioner, who is arrayed as A3 facing charges for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 418, 465, 468, 471 and 420 I.P.C. in Crime No.289 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police, has come forward with this application, seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is residing in Chennai, in the given address and he wanted to purchase some property in Nanguneri Village, Tirunelveli District. Only after getting proper sale consideration A2 executed a sale deed in favour of the petitioner/A3 to an extent of 52 cents out of 2.02 acres in Survey No.234 of Nanguneri Village, after making enquiry only, the petitioner paid sale consideration to A2. However it was brought to the notice of the petitioner as per complaint given by the de-facto complainant that the aforesaid land belongs to the de-facto complainant and hence, the petitioner is an innocent person, paid his money towards the sale consideration with a bonafide intention. 4.The learned public Prosecutor(Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent has not disputed the fact that there is no bad antecedents against the petitioner. It is seen that the petitioner/A3 paid sale consideration to A2. As contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, there could be possibility https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ that the sale deed could have been executed by A2 making the petitioner to believe that the land belongs to the co-accused/A2 which is not disputed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that there is no bad antecedents against the petitioner and the sale consideration was paid by the petitioner to the co-accused, I find it just and reasonable to grant anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri and on executing a personal 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously. 6.The petitioners 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 stand dismissed. sd/- 08/11/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NANGUNERI 2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT 3.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE NANGUNERI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT +1. CC to M/S. S.RAMASAMY Advocate SR.No.38342 rl/6 c- 12.11.2011 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.13678 of 2011 Date :08/11/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/