CRL OP(MD)/23585/2013 of MARIAPPAN Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE on 30 December 2013

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.23585 of 2013

1 MARIAPPAN

2 ARJUN ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED 3&4

Vs

THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ACHANPUDUR POLICE STATION,TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

(CR.NO.184 OF 2013) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT

For Petitioner : M/S.M.SARAVANAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S.A.P.BALASUBRAMANI, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side)

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

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.A3 and A4 and theyare apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police forthe alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 465,468, 470, 420, 294(b) and 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.184 of 2013,and hence they seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused No.1 and 2 inthis case had obtained a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- from the defactocomplainant and executed a sale deed in favour of the defactocomplainant, misrepresenting that the property belongs to them. Whenthe same was questioned by the defacto complainant and questionedthe same, the Petitioners have criminally intimated the defactocomplainant and hence the present complaint was lodged by thedefacto complainant.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that theland in question was cultivated and was in possession and enjoymentof accused No.1 to 4 and the same was sold to the defactocomplainant on 1.9.2006. A1-Amutha is the wife of Mariappan(A3).Nagarajan(A2) is the son of Amutha and Mariappan. Similarly the A4-Arjunan is the son of Amutha and Mariappan. It is further submittedby the Petitioners that accused No.1 and 2 have only committed theoffence of cheating and they have been already arrested and remandedto judicial custody on 22.12.2013. The Petitioners herein/A3 and A4https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/are in no way connected with the alleged commission of offence andhence they prays for the relief of anticipatory bail.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that itis purely a civil dispute between the family members and that theoffence has been committed on misrepresentation between them.

5. From the facts and circumstances, it appears that the youngerbrother of Mariappan is the defacto complainant by name Manoharanand they were living together and the defacto complainant knewabout the possession of the land in question. Therefore the questionof cheating does not arise at all and hence, this Court is inclinedto enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail.

6. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released onbail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before thelearned Judicial Magistrate,Special Court for Land Grabbing,Tirunelveli and on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupeesten thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to thesatisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on furthercondition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondentpolice daily at 11.00 a.m for a period of two weeks and thereafteras and when required. The petitioners shall comply with thecondition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C., scrupulously.

7. The petitioners shall appear before the concerned Magistratewithin a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copymade ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail standsdismissed.

sd/-

30/12/2013

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SPECIAL COURT FOR LAND GRABBING, TIRUNELVELI. TIRUNELVELI.

2 -DO-THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUNELVELI.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ACHANPUDUR POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

4 THE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S.M.SARAVANAN Advocate SR.No.64476.

msm 31.12.2013 p2/6c