1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Thirtieth day of September Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.12737 of 2011 M. AYYANAR ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.1 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE POOVANTHI POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT, CRIME NO.124/2011 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. G.ANBU SARAVANAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.RAMAR, Addl.Public Prosecutor ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner is arrayed as A1 and he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 01.09.2011 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 417, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 120(B) of I.P.C., in Crime No.124 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks bail. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has purchased a property from one Dulasiram, who is the owner of S.No.501/1 in patta No.520, but the defacto complainant's forefather is one Dulasiram, he is entirely different persons. He further submitted that the petitioner has purchased the property on 17.06.1996, on the date onwards, he is in possession and enjoyment of the same, but taking advantage of the present scenario, the defacto complainant has given a false complainant against the petitioner and others. He further submitted that A2 and A3 are the attestor, A4 is the document writer, A2 died, A3 has already been enlarged on bail and A4 has already been granted anticipatory bail. He further submitted that the investigation is considerably over and he is in custody for the past 30 days and hence, he prays for enlargement on bail. 3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner has created a forged sale deed by way of impersonation in the year 1996 and the investigation is going on and hence, he prays for dismissal of this application. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4. Considering the rival submissions made by both sides and on perusal of the document it is seen that the Survey No.501/1 is belonging to one Dulasiram, from whom, the petitioner has purchased the property and registered a sale deed on 17.06.1996, in which A2 and A3 are the attestor and A4 is the document writer. A2 died, A3 has already been enlarged on bail and A4 has already been granted anticipatory bail, but the case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the legal heir of Dulasiram, however, they have not filed any document before this Court. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and also considering the fact that the petitioner has purchased the property from the lawful owner and he is in possession for the past 16 years, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail 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.II, Sivagangai, and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the Court concerned daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. sd/- 30/09/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II,SIVAGANGAI. 2 DO-THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIVAGANGAI. 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,POOVANTHI POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT. 4 THE OFFICER INCHARGE,SUB JAIL,SIVAGANGAI. 5 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1 CC to M/S. G.ANBU SARAVANAN Advocate SR.No.34495 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12737 of 2011 Date :30/09/2011 PA/03.10.2011/2P/7C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/