BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Twelfth day of August Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.9343 of 2011 KUMARESAN ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.3 Vs STATE REP. BY ITS THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ARAVAKURICHI POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT, CRIME NO.384/2009 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. A.K.BASKARAPANDIAN 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 / Accused No.3 apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 149, 120(B), 341, 365, 342, 506(ii) (two counts), 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C. in Crime No.384 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner arrayed as A3 and he is only a attestor of sale deed in favour of A1. The alleged sale deed taken place on 05.10.2004 and the complaint given on 02.09.2008 and that has been forwarded under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. and subsequently a case was registered in Crime No.23 of 2008 and subsequently transferred to the respondent police, Karur in Crime No.384 of 2009. Hence, he prays for enlargement on anticipatory bail. 3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner / A3 is the only attestor of the document and he is also to assist for execution of sale deed and the investigation is going on hence, he prays for dismissal of petition. 4. Considering the rival submissions made on both sides, admittedly, the de-facto complainant is the owner of the property. He further submits that A1 and A2 were abducted the de-facto complainant and got sale deed in favour of A1 and on perusal of typed set the petitioner only an attestor of the document and even though the sale deed was executed on 05.10.2004 and the complaint was given only on 02.09.2008 and even though the petitioner was not arrested, he has https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ neither interfered with the investigation nor absconded from the jurisdiction, 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 his arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Karur, 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 No.2, Karur 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/- 12/08/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) To 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.2 KARUR 2 -DO-THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE KARUR 3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ARAVAKURICHI POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT +1. CC to M/S. A.K.BASKARAPANDIAN Advocate SR.No.27539 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.9343 of 2011 Date :12/08/2011 SMA/17.8.2011/6C/2P https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/