Rajkumar v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty First day of February Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice R. PONGIAPPAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.3443 of 2022 RAJKUMAR [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CCB-TEAM XVII POLICE STATION, CHENNAI DISTRICT.

CRIME NO.199 OF 2021.

For Petitioner : M.RAVIKUMAR Advocate For Respondent : Mrs.G.V.KASTHURI, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 30.11.2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 465, 467, 468, 471 & 34 of IPC in Crime No.199 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused created a forged document and by impersonation created a bogus Power of Attorney and grabbed the property belongs to the de facto complainant. Hence, the complaint. 3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court. It is his further submission that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 30.11.2021 onwards. Hence, he prays for bail. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecution appearing for the respondent police raised objection stating that investigation is pending. She would further submit that during the relevant point of time, the petitioner being A-7 instigated A-1 and both prepared false Power of Attorney for selling the petition mentioned property.

5. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side. The respondent police registered a case against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 465, 467, 468, 471 & 34 of IPC. The allegation raised against the petitioner is that, during the time of occurrence, he created the bogus Power of Attorney in respect of the land belongs to the de facto complainant. Now, investigation is pending, without seeing the result of investigation, the active role played by the petitioner, cannot be ascertained. Here, it is a case, after fabricating the false Power of Attorney, the same was registered before the SRO office. Though, the investigation was not completed, the role played by the petitioner would go to show that he was actively participated and hence, the present FIR has been registered.

Therefore, I am of the opinion that if this type of petitioner is released on bail, he may try to tamper the witness and hamper the investigation. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 21/02/2022 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CCB-TEAM XVII POLICE STATION, CHENNAI DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL, CHENNAI.

CC to M.RAVIKUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.3443/2022 Date :21/02/2022 TA-28/02/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/