BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twenty Eighth day of December Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE S. RAJESWARAN CRL OP(MD) No.17395 of 2011 P.RAJENDRAN, ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, MADURAI RURAL, MADURAI DISTRICT. (CR.NO.NOT KNOWN OF 2011) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. S.KARTHIK Advocate For Respondent : MR.C.RAMESH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) 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 420, 465 of IPC. He has approached this Court for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Heard Mr.S.K.Karthik, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.C.Ramesh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3. The petitioner claimed to be a document writer and he has nothing to do with the transaction that took place between the parties. However, the charges have been framed against him. It is stated that in the year 2008, Joseph has purchased the land from one Muthugeethari and Rajkumar through a registered sale deed dated 07.08.2008 and 12.08.2008 respectively. The said Joseph has filed a suit in O.S.No. 156 of 2011 before the District Munsif Court, Vadipatti, for injunction. Therefore, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, this is a civil dispute and the the petitioner was frequently called for interrogation by the respondent police and as such he is having apprehension of arrest. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he did not committed any crime as stated in the complaint. He would submit that he has been falsely https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ implicated in this case. He would also submit that he is also having permanent residence and therefore, he would request for the grant of anticipatory bail. 5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit in his argument that due to land dispute, the petitioner has been implicated. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and 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. 6. In view of the above, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, of course, subject to certain stringent conditions. 7. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest or on his appearance before the Judicial Magistrate concerned on executing 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, Madurai, and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for the purpose of interrogation. 8. 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/- 28/12/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, MADURAI. 2. -DO- THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI. 3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, MADURAI RURAL, MADURAI DISTRICT. 4. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. S.KARTHIK Advocate SR.No.46171 SR : 29.12.2011 : 2p/6c ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.17395 of 2011 Date :28/12/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/