CRL OP(MD)/23587/2013 of SINGATHURAI Vs THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE on 30 December 2013

Monday, the Thirtieth day of December Two Thousand Thirteen PRESENTThe Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASHCRL OP(MD) No.23587 of 2013

1 SINGATHURAI 2 PRADEEP KUMAR 3 JEYA LAKSHMI 4 RANI ... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED NO.1 TO 4

Vs

THE STATE REP.BYTHE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE UTHAMAPALAYAM POLICE STATION,THENI DISTRICT.(CR.NO.253 OF 2013) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT

For Petitioner : M/S.L.PRAVEEN KUMAR AdvocateFor Respondent : MR.A.P.BALASUBRAMANIAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondentpolice for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 294(b), 420and 506(i) of IPC., in Crime No.253 of 2013, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The defacto complainant is the brother of A1. A3 and A4 aresisters of the defacto complainant. A2 is the son of A1. It is the caseof the defacto complainant that the land in question is ancestral land,wherein he has got a share. His elder brother has settled the land infavour of his son A2 and A2 to A4 actively assisted for the same.

3. The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) submitted that it is acase where the land in question was settled in favour of the son of A1 inorder to cheat the defacto complainant.

4. This Court posed a question to the learned counsel for thepetitioners that if A1 cancels the deed of settlement executed in favourof A2, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copyof this order, then there will be an order of anticipatory bail in favourof the petitioners and for this, the learned counsel appearing for thepetitioners agreed.

5. This Court, taking into consideration of the above said facts andcircumstances, is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on interimanticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to bereleased on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance beforethe learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam and on executing a bondhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two suretieseach for a like sum to the satisfaction of thelearned Magistrateconcerned and on further condition that the first petitioner/A1 shall cancel the settlement deed executed in favour of A2 within a period offour weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is madeclear that in the event of failure to execute the cancellation ofsettlement deed, the interim anticipatory bail granted in favour of thepetitioners shall stand cancelled without any further reference to thisCourt and the respondent is at liberty to arrest the petitioners /accused and on a further condition that the first petitioner shall appearbefore the respondent daily at 11.00 a.m., for a period of two weeks andthereafter, as and when required. In so far as the petitioners 2 to 4 areconcerned, they shall appear before the respondents, as and whenrequired. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulatedunder Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

6. The petitioners shall appear before the concerned Magistratewithin a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy madeready failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed.

sd/-

30/12/2013

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO

1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,UTHAMAPALAYAM.

2.DO THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THENI.

3.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

4.THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE UTHAMAPALAYAM POLICE STATION,THENI DISTRICT.

+1. CC to M/S.L.PRAVEEN KUMAR Advocate SR.No.9