BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Thirteenth day of October Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S.NAGAMUTHU CRL OP(MD) No.13465 of 2011 SIVAPRAKASAM : PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 Vs. THE STATE REP.BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, MADURAI DISTRICT. CRIME NO.62/2011 : RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. S.MUNIYANDI Advocate For Respondent : Mr. K.S.DURAIPANDI Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for offences under Sections 120(b), 419, 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code in Crime No.62 of 2011, the petitioner is now before this Court seeking Anticipatory Bail. 2. According to the case of prosecution, the father of the defacto complainant by name Mr.Ramasamy was the owner of the property in question. The said property, later on, taken over by the Government. In this regard, the de facto complainant did not receive any notice. Therefore, he went to the Office of the Tahsildar and enquired the matter. He came to know that the property was sold by yet another Ramasamy in favour of the other accused. Thereafter, he went to the Office of the Sub – Registrar and verified. One of the accused, by name, Mr.Ramasamy, who has got no title over the property in question, had impersonated the real owner of the property and created general power of attorney, and thereafter, sold the property. The petitioner was only an attester to the forged documents. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since the petitioner is only an attester, he is entitled for Anticipatory Bail. 4. In my considered view, whether the petitioner is an innocent and he had any role to play is the matter is to be investigated by the police. As of now, there are allegations made against him and there is a very strong case made against him. 5. Having regard to the above facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that it is not a fit case for grant of Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner. Therefore, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 13/10/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, MADURAI DISTRICT. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.13465 of 2011 Date :13/10/2011 NSV/20.10.11/2P/3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/