Madras High Court
CRL OP(MD)/23635/2013 of CHELLASAMY Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE on 30 December 2013
BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Thirtieth day of December Two Thousand Thirteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.23635 of 2013 1 CHELLASAMY 2 THANGAM ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.2 AND 3 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT( Criminal Jurisdiction )Monday, the Thirtieth day of December Two Thousand ThirteenPRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr.Justice P.N.PRAKASH
CRL OP(MD) No.23635 of 2013
1 CHELLASAMY
2 THANGAM ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.2 AND 3
Vs
THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CHINDUPATTI POLICE STATION, CR.NO.190 OF 2013, MADURAI DT. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
For Petitioner : M/S.V.ARUL RAJA Advocate For 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, who are arrayed as A2 and A3, pray for the grantof anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for the allegedcommission of offences punishable under Sections 420 and 468 I.P.C., inCrime No.190 of 2013, on the file of the respondent police.
2. The de facto complainant by name Nallakkal is the mother of oneAmavasai (shown as A1) and the petitioners/A2 and A3 are the sons of thesaid Amavasai (A1). It is represented that on 15.10.2000, the saidAmavasai (A1) sold the ancestral property to one Pounthai. Thereafter,in the year 2003, A1 died. The mother of the said Amavasai (A1) has nowlodged a complaint on 25.11.2013 alleging that her deceased son had soldher property to Pounthai. The petitioners herein are the grandsons ofthe de facto complainant and sons of the said Amavasai (A1). There isno overtact as alleged against the petitioners herein and they werenever a party to the same at all.
4. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances, thisCourt is of the view that the petitioners can be granted the relief ofanticipatory bail and accordingly; (a) In the event of arrest by or on appearance before the respondentpolice; (b) In the event of appearance before the learned JudicialMagistrate, Tirumangalam, within 15 days from the date of receipt ofcopy of the order,
(i) the petitioners shall be enlarged on bail on executing a bondfor Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) each, with two sureties eachfor the like sum to their satisfaction;
(ii) the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make anyinducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact ofthe case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Courtor to any Police Officer;
(iii) The petitioners shall be available for interrogation by therespondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for two weeks and thereafter as andwhen required.
sd/-
Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO
1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,TIRUMANGALAM.
2 DO-THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,MADURAI.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
CHINDUPATTI POLICE STATION,MADURAI DT.
4THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,MADURAI.
+1 CC to M/S.V.ARUL RAJA Advocate SR.No.34
PA/02.01.2014/2P/6C