BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty Eighth day of November Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH CRL OP(MD) No.14480 of 2011 M.DHANUSKODI : PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 Vs. THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, MADURAI DISTRICT. IN CR.NO.64 OF 2011 : RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. M.VEILKANI RAJU Advocate For Respondent : Mr. K.S.DURAIPANDIAN Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 120(B), 409, 420, 468, 477 and 506(i) of IPC. He has approached this Court for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Heard Mr.M.Veilkani Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.S.Durai Pandian, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit in his argument that the petitioner is the power agent and he sold the property to one Selvam and in-turn, he has given power deed to the de-facto complainant in respect of the same property and it has been stated that he has gifted the Panchayat Board and the de-facto complainant has given a complaint that the petitioner is not eligible to give the property to the Panchayat Board. He would further submit in his argument that the petitioner has no intention to commit any offence since the de-facto complainant himself has filed a suit to declare the said sale deed as null and void before the Civil Court and the same is pending against the petitioner as well as the Panchayat Board. He would further submit in his argument that the petitioner is an aged person and he is also having a permanent residence and therefore, he would request for the grant of anticipatory bail. 4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit in his argument that the petitioner has executed the Gift Deed in favour of the Panchayat Board even that he has already sold the same to one Selvam and in-turn, the said Selvam executed power deed in favour of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the de-facto complainant on 18.10.2007. He would further submit in his argument that the petitioner has wantonly executed the said Gift Deed even though he has no title to the said property. However, if for any reason, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, suitable conditions may be passed for the secured presence of the petitioner. 5. Considering the submissions made on either side, this Court could see that whether there is any criminality against the petitioner has to be found out only at the conclusion of the investigation since the matter relates to civil dispute in between the parties. It is brought to the notice of this Court that already there is a civil suit pending before the Civil Court in between the de-facto complainant and the petitioner. In the said circumstances, I find a prima facie case for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, of course, subject to certain stringent conditions. 6. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or on his appearance before the Judicial Magistrate concerned 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.I, Madurai, and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders for the purpose of interrogation. 7. The petitioner shall appear before the Magistrate concerned within a period of 15 days, failing which, the anticipatory bail granted shall stand automatically cancelled. Sd/- 28/11/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.1, MADURAI. 2. -DO- THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI DISTRICT. 3. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. 4. THE INSEPCTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, MADURAI DISTRICT. +1 CC to M/S. M.VEILKANI RAJU Advocate SR.No.41684 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.14480 of 2011 Date :28/11/2011 NSV/1.12.11/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/