BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Sixteenth day of September Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT THE HON`BLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.12287 of 2011 M.V. MUTHURAMALINGAM ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 Vs THE STAE REPRESENTED BY THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, MADURAI, MADURAI DISTRICT. CRIME NO.61/2011 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT FOR PETITIONER : MR.KATHIRVELU SENIOR COUNSEL FOR M/S.S.RAGAVENTHRE ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT : MR.A.RAMAR ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL UNDER SEC.438 CR.P.C. ORDER : THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER :- The petitioner/Accused No.1 apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 120 (b),341,431,403,506(ii) IPC and Section 3(ii) of TNPPDL Act, in Crime No.61 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 is arrayed as A1 in Crime No.61 of 2011 registered under Sections 120(b),341,431,403,506(ii) IPC and Section 3(ii) of TNPPDL Act. He would further submit that in the complaint itself, it is stated that there were a two occurrences taken i.e., Prior to 2009 stating that the petitioner and along with others purchased the property in and around the property belonging to the de-facto complainant's and there is water channels and blocking the channel and that factum was intimated to the Collector as well as to the Superintendent of Police for taking action but no action has been taken. He would further submit that in the second part of F.I.R on 12.09.2011, the petitioner and other two has criminal intimidated threatened with iron rod demanding to execute the sale deed in favour them. Hence, the complaint is given by the de-facto complainant and the case has been registered. 3.Mr.KathirVelu, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is running a Trust under the name and style of Velammal Vidyalaya CBSE School in Survey Nos.56/7,8,9,57/3,4,5,11,12,76/1,2,3,4,75/1A,1B, 2,3,4,9,10,11,12,13A,13B & 13C. The petitioner not encroached upon the property possessed by the de-facto complainant in Survey Nos.58 and 59. He also filed a photograph showing that the de-facto complainant owned 1 Acre 77 cents and that has been kept vacant and it was on the right side of the compound wall and he is nothing to do with the property. On, 05.11.2009, the de-facto complainant along with his relatives have issued notice through their https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Counsel and suitable reply was issued on 10.11.2009, due to the present scenario, the de-facto complainant has filed a complaint against the petitioner and the petitioner is a Chairman of Velammal Educational Trust and nearly 65,000 students are studying and there are 4,500 employees are working in the Institution in Tamil Nadu. Now the petitioner is apprehending arrest and hence, he prays for enlargement on anticipatory bail. 4.Refuting the same, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side) submits that the de-facto complainant is the owner of the property in Survey Nos. 58/1A, 58/3,58/5 and 59/5 in Anuppanadi, Madurai and the patta stands in the name of the de-facto complainant and two sons and they were cultivating in the property by rising Paddy and Cucumber, by irrigating the land has been produced through the channel called “solakattai”. The petitioner is the Chairman of the Velammal Institution. He purchased the land in and around the property and the petitioner has constructed the compound wall blocking the entry of the de-facto complainant's land and also closed the channel “Solakattai” and he forced the de-facto complainant to part with the property to sung. One week prior to the complaint when the de-facto complainant and two sons went into the property, and at the time, A1 along with other accused threatened the de-facto complainant with iron rod and they attacked the de-facto complainant and compelled them to sell the property and that is the only source of income to the de-facto complainant and the investigation is at earlier stage and hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition. 5.Considering the rival submissions made on both sides, it is seen that admittedly, the de-facto complainant is the owner of the property in Survey Nos. 58/1A, 58/3,58/5 and 59/5 in Anuppanadi, Madurai, and also the petitioner is the Chairman of Velammal Educational Trust and he is having the property and he is running the School in Survey Nos. 56/7,8,9, 57/3,4,5,11,12, 76/1,2,3,4, 75/1A,1B, 2,3,4,9,10,11,12,13A,13B & 13C. The case of the prosecution is that on prior to 12.09.2011, the petitioner has purchased the property in and around the property of de- facto complainant and he obstructed the “ “solakattai” channel and they gave a complaint and legal notice was issued on 05.11.2009 and a suitable reply was given by the petitioner on 10.11.2009 and after that no steps have been taken and now the complaint was given on 12.09.2011 and in that, it was stated that one week prior to that, the de-facto complainant and two sons visited the property and at that time, the petitioner along with other two persons made a criminal intimidation and attempted to assault with iron rod and they forced the de-facto complainant to execute the sale deed for lower price. 6.Considering the averments made in the FIR along with the document filed by the petitioner it is clearly proved that the property is situated outside the compound wall of the petitioner's property. Even though the de-facto complainant herein issued a notice stated that water channel has been blocked by the petitioner herein and suitable reply was given on 10.11.2009, but he kept quite all along and no action has been taken. Taking advantage of the present scenario, she gave a complaint on 12.09.2011 as if one week prior to the complaint, the de-fato complainant and her two sons visited the property at the time, the petitioners and others made a criminal intimidation, since the petitioner is a Chairman of the Velammal Educational Trust, he owns the property adjacent to the de-facto complainant's property. The petitioner's CBSE School is not situated in the petitioner's property and as per the dictum of this Court, the water body were restored by the Government. In such https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ circumstances, the petitioner herein has taken steps and she gave a complaint to the Collector, Superintendent of Police and the Collector is a competent person to restore the water body. 7.Considering the complaint, since it is only a motivated one and furthermore, considering the delay of one year and the investigation is considerably over and even though the petitioner was not arrested he neither interfered with the investigation nor absconded from the jurisdiction. Hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 8.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.I, Madurai and on his 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 concerned 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. 9.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/- 16/09/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, MADURAI. 2 DO-THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI. 3 THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, MADURAI DISTRICT. 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1 CC TO M/S.S.RAGAVENTHRE, ADVOCATE SR.NO.31828. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12287 of 2011 Date :16/09/2011 3P/6C RPB 19.09.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/