BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Ninth day of September Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT THE HON`BLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.11787 of 2011 1. M.MALAIYAMMAL, 2. M.JOTHIBASU, ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED No.6 & 7 Vs STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NANGUNERI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DT. (CRIME NO. 275 OF 2011) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. P. PETHU RAJESH Advocate For Respondent : A.RAMAR, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 418, 419, 468, 471, 420 of IPC in Crime No.275 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 first petitioner is arrayed as A6 and he purchased the property from one Karuppasamy, who is the legal heir of the original owner viz., Renganathan Pillai, and the said Renganathan Pillai got the property by way of grant of patta by the revenue officials. He further submits that A6 has purchased the property in the year 2009 and he has gone to the place in the year 2010, at the time the defacto complainant putting fences on the property and hence, A6 forced to file a suit in O.S.No.171 of 2010 against the de-facto complainant and another for declaration of title and injunction and th esame is pending, then he also taking steps for cancellation of patta against which the petitioner herein has filed a Writ Petition and obtained a stay. He further submits that the civil proceedings are pending, taking advantage of present scenario, a false complaint has been foisted against this petitioners. The second petiitoner/A7 is only the attestor of the sale deed and hence, he prays for enlargement on anticipatory bail. 3. Refuting the same, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the case has been registered against eight persons on 29.08.2011 under Sections 418, 419, 468, 471 and 420 of IPC. The petitioners are A6 and A7, A7 is the attestor of the sale deed in favour of A6, A6 purchased the property from A5. A5 is the brother of the de- facto complainant. A5 sold the property as if, he is sole legal heir of the original owner viz., Renganathan Pillai and the investigation going on and hence, he prays for dismissal of this Application. 4. Considering the rival submission made by both sides and the admitted fact is that the property is belonging to one Renganathan https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Pillai. As per the version of the Additional Public Prosecutor, the de- facto complainant and the vendor of the first petitioner/A6 are brothers, but the vendor is arrayed as A5. A5 sold the property as if he is only the legal heir of the deceased Renganathan Pillai andhe alienated the property in favour of the first petitioner, who is arrayed as A6. A7 is the attestor. In stead of filing a suit for partition they have come forward with this application and hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 5. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri and on each of them execute 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners shall report before the court concerned daily at 10.30 am., 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 the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed. sd/- 09/09/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NANGUNERI 2. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUNELVELI 3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NANGUNERI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. 4. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. P. PETHU RAJESH Advocate SR.No.30808 GH : 15.09.2011 : 2P/6C ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.11787 of 2011 Date :09/09/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/