BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Second day of August Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.9727 of 2011 ANBUMEENRAL ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.2 Vs STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, SIVANGANGAI DIST. CR.NO.17 OF 2011 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. S.M.SANJAY Advocate For Respondent : M/S. A.RAMAR, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner filed this petition seeking for anticipatory bail for the alleged offences punishable under Section 420 IPC, in Crime No.17 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's husband has promised to sell the property to the de-facto complainant and got Rs.1,50,000/- as advance. Since he has not complied with the promise, the de-facto complainant has issued a legal notice and he also gave a complaint. In this regard, A1 was arrested and released on bail and though the petitioner is nothing to do with the said offence, she has been arrayed as an accused. Hence the petitioner apprehending arrest and seeking for anticipatory bail. 3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the de-facto complainant has entered into a sale agreement with the first accused. Since there is another sale agreement in respect of the same property, the investigation is going on. He fairly conceded that A1 was arrested and enlarged on bail and hence seeks for dismissal of the petition. 4. Considering the rival submissions and the averments made in the FIR, it could be seen that the first accused entered into sale agreement with Kanniammal alias Deivaknai and on the basis of sale agreement with the de-facto complainant, he received an advance, but not executed the sale deed. Hence, the de-facto complainant gave a complaint and a case has been registered. A1 was already arrested and enlarged on bail. A2 is nothing to do with the commission of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ offence and she is only the wife of the Vellaian / A2. Hence I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 5. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi, and 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 learned Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi, and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the Court concerned daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously. 6. 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, anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed. sd/- 02/08/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE KARAIKUDI 2 -DO-THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE SIVAGANGAI 3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, SIVANGANGAI DIST. +1. CC to M/S. S.M.SANJAY Advocate SR.No.25620 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.9727 of 2011 Date :02/08/2011 SMA/03.8.2011/6C/2P https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/