1 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.9160 of 2011 1 ESWARAN 2 MANICKAM :PETITIONERS / ACCUSED -Vs- THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THEVARAM POLICE STATION, THENI DT. CR.NO.136/11 :RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. N.RANJITH, 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 petitioners/A1 and A4 apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under sections 120(b), 419 and 420 I.P.C. in Crime No.136 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are arrayed as A1 and A4. A3 had executed a sale deed on 6.3.2011 in favour of A2 as if the property belonging to him and A1 and A4 are attestors of the said sale deed but the property belonging to the de-facto complainant and complaint has been given on 05.07.2011 and the investigation is considerably over. Hence, they prayed for enlargement on anticipatory bail. 3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the property belonging to the de-facto complainant that the third accused as if he has the owner of the property executed a sale deed in favour of A2, the petitioner's, who are arrayed as A1 and A4, are attestors of the document and the investigation is in initial stage of hence, he prays for dismissal of this application. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4.Considering the submissions and averments made in the petition this court could find that A3 sold the ancestral property of the de-facto complainant to A2 and with the help of the petitioners. The sale deed has been executed on 06.03.2011 and the case has been registered on05.07.2011. Even though they were not arrested, they neither interfered with the investigation nor absconded from the jurisdiction, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. 5.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bodinaickanur, and each of them 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, Bodinaickanur and on further condition that the petitioners shall report before the court concerned 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, anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed. sd/- 02/08/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO: 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Bodinaickanur, Theni District. 2.-Do- Thro' The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theni. 3.The Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 4.The Inspector of Police, Thevaram Police Station, Theni District. +1. CC to M/S. N.RANJITH Advocate SR.No.25870. RP/05.08.2011/2P/6C. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.9160 of 2011 Date :02/08/2011. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/