Syed Javeed Ahmed @ Javeed Khayum v. The State Rep.By The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24-01-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP No.418 of 2025 1.Syed Javeed Ahmed @ Javeed Khayum 2.Syed Naveed Ahmed 3.Syed Zohed Ahmed 4.Syed Zain Ahmed 5.Meher Fathima @ Mona 6.Syed Fareed Ahmed 7.Syed Sayeed Ahmed 8.Syeed Junaid Ahmed @ Junaid Ahmed Petitioner(s) Vs The State Represented By, The Inspector of Police, DCB Police Station, Krishnagiri.
Crime No.2 of 2024 Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):
Mr.C.Iyyapparaj For Respondent(s):
Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.2 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 506(ii) and 120 B of Indian Penal Code, 1860, the present petition has been filed by A8 to
A15 seeking anticipatory bail.
2. Pleading innocence on the part of the petitioners and false implication in the case, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks indulgence of this court. He would submit that the petitioners, owners of the property in question, are arrayed as A8 to A15 and it is only A1, A2 and A4, who have claimed to be running real estate business alongwith A3, by falsely inducing the de facto complainant that the petitioners have offered to sell their property, had collected money from the defacto complainant and cheated him. The petitioners have not even met the de facto complainant and since the other accused misused the names of the petitioners, they have been roped in the case. He would also submit that the co-accused had already been granted anticipatory bail. He would further submit that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court.
3. The case of the prosecution as putforth by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, opposing for grant of anticipatory bail is that the defacto complainant lent an amount of Rs.8.34 Crores to A-1 and A-3, for doing a real estate business. He would submit that the specific overtact against these petitioners viz., A8 to A15 is that they received an amount of Rs.72,52,000/- from the defacto complainant for selling their property through A1 and A4, however, they neither executed the
sale deed nor returned the amount to the defacto complainant.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record, this court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
5. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Krishnagiri, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] if the petitioners fail to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled;
[b] the petitioners 1 to 4 and 6 to 8 shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., until
further orders, the 5th petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m for a period of one week and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];
[f] If the accused, thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.
24.01.2025 dsn/ssk.
To
1. The Inspector of Police, DCB Police Station, Krishnagiri.
2. Judicial Magistrate-II, Krishnagiri.
3. Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.
dsn/ssk.
24.1.2025.