CRL OP(MD)/17259/2011 of G.N.SUNDARPANDIAN Vs INSPECTOR OF POLICE on 28 December 2011

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT( Criminal Jurisdiction )

Wednesday, the Twenty Eighth day of December Two Thousand ElevenPRESENT

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S. RAJESWARAN

CRL OP(MD) Nos.17259 and 17386 of 2011

Vs

1.STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ANTI LAND GRABBING WING, THANJAVUR

2.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PATTUKOTTAI TOWN POLICE STATION, THANJAVUR DISTRICT, CR.NO.552/2011 ..RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT IN BOTH THE PETITIONS

For Respondent : Mr.C.RAMESH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

The petitioners, in both the petitions , apprehend arrest atthe hands of the respondent police for the alleged offencepunishable under Sections 294(b), 467, 420 and 506(ii) of IPCand under Section 4 of Women Harassment Act, in Crime No.552 of2011 , on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatorybail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2.Heard Mr.V.Bharathi Dasan, learned counsel appearing forhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/the petitioners in Crl.OP(MD)No.17259 of 2011 and Mr.C.Bharathi,learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in Crl.OP(MD)No.17386 of 2011 and Mr.C.Ramesh, learned Additional PublicProsecutor appearing for the State.

3.THe case of the petitioners is that they are brothers andthey are co-accused in Crime No.552 of 2011. The petitioners/A2to A3 have sold the common undivided property to the de-factocomplainant and it was objected to by A-1, the other brother,the petitioner in Crl.MP(MD)No.17386 of 2011.

4.Further, the Accused No.1 has also filed a suit inO.S.No.71 of 2008 before the District Munsif Court, Pattukottaiand obtained an order of injunction in I.A.No.122 of 2008against his brothers and Sub-Registrar not to register the saledeed executed by A2 and A3.

5.As a counter blast, the de-facto complainant has given acomplaint against all the brothers. It is also reported that A-4has alredy got bail from the trial Court and the A-5 has alsoobtained anticipatory bail from this Court.

6.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit thatdue to civil dispute, the petitioners have been implicated. Hewould further submit that investigation is pending and if forany reason, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail tothe petitioners, suitable conditions may be passed for thesecured presence of the petitioners.

7.In the light of the above, I am inclined to grantanticipatory bail to the petitioners, of course, subject tocertain stringent conditions.

8.Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be releasedon anticipatory bail, in the event of their arrest or on theirappearanace before the Judicial Magistrate concerned, onexecuting separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees TenThousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to thesatisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai,and on further condition that the petitioners shall appearbefore the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period ofthree weeks.

9.THe petitioners shall appear before the Magistrateconcerned within a period of 15 days, failing which, theanticipatory bail granted shall stand automatically cancelled.

sd/-

28/12/2011

/ TRUE COPY /

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Madurai - 625 023.

TO

1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE

PATTUKOTTAI

2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THANJAVUR DISTRICT

3.TEH INSPECTOR OF POLICE

ANTI LAND GRABBING WING, THANJAVUR

4.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

PATTUKOTTAI TOWN POLICE STATION, THANJAVUR DISTRICT

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

+1. CC to M/S. V.BHARATHIDASAN Advocate SR.No.46193+One cc to M/s.C.BHARATHI, Advocate, SR.No.46192rl/8c – 28.12.2011