1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.12.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15171 of 2011 Rev.Bro.I.Sebestian ... Petitioner Vs. State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, Devadhanapatti Police Station, Theni District. (Crime No.109 of 2000) ... Respondent PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to direct the learned Judicial Magistrate, Periyakulam to return the document, deposited by the above mentioned petitioner on the direction of this Court and above named petitioner under take to execute the bond for a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- and the same may be surety till the disposal in Crl.R.C.No.747 of 2008 dated 18.09.2008. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kanagarajan For Respondent : Mr.P.Kannithevan, G.A.(Crl.side) O R D E R Heard Mr.S.Kanagarajan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent. 2.According to the petitioner, he has produced documents of title regarding his immovable properties towards the security for withdrawing the sum of Rs.6 lakhs with accrued interest as per the order of this Court made on 18.09.2008 in Crl.R.C.(MD)No.747 of 2008. He would also submit that the trial has not been commenced and the accused absconded and therefore, non bailable warrant is pending against him and there is no chance for taking up the case in the near future and the documents of title produced by him are required for the petitioner and he is ready to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.6 lakhs and the same may be substituted with the documents of title submitted by the petitioner as immovable property security and they may be ordered to be returned. 3.The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) would submit in his argument that the said amount ordered to be returned and to be paid to the petitioner on furnishing the immovable property security to the tune of Rs.6 lakhs and he has also produced the documents of the immovable property and got the money with interest. He would further submit that https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 the execution of the bond for the sum of Rs.6 lakhs would not be sufficient to set aside the order passed by this Court at an earlier point of time. 4.However, the learned counsel for the petitioner would make an offer to the effect that the petitioner is in need of the documents of the title submitted by him and he is ready to substitute with some other immovable property as security for the same extent of Rs.6 lakhs and he may be permitted to do so within a period of 15 days. 5.The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) has also submitted that in case of substitution of immovable property security with some other equivalent immovable property security, he has no serious objection. 6.Considering the same, this Court is inclined to permit the petitioner to substitute some other valid immovable property security with its original documents of title for the said sum, to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Periyakulam in lieu of the earlier immovable property security already received by the said Court as per the direction of this Court made in Crl.R.C.No.747 of 2008 dated 18.09.2008. Such a substitution of the immovable property security shall be produced to the tune of the said amount of Rs.6 lakhs and its accrued interest and Court concerned is directed to accept the same on proper verification of those documents, in lieu of the earlier immovable property security and if done so, to release the earlier security. 7.With the above said directions, the petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- Deputy Registrar (Writs) /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Periyakulam 2.The Inspector of Police, Devadhanapatti Police Station, Theni District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15171 of 2011 15.12.2011 nbj RJ/26.12.11 2p/4c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/