Al.Nachal v. Commissioner Of Police
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
The petitioners/A2 and A4, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 21.12.2023 for the offences registered under Sections 420, 409, 506(i), 120B and 34 of IPC in Crime No.232 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.
2.As a matter of fact, the first petitioner had earlier filed Crl.O.P.No.22333 of 2023 along with A1 and the second petitioner had filed Crl.O.P.No.24313 of 2023 along with 5 other accused, both seeking anticipatory bail. Both the said Criminal Original Petitions had come up for consideration before this Court and orders were pronounced on 18.12.2023 rejecting the reliefs sought for anticipatory bail not only for these petitioners but also for all the accused. 3.Subsequently, on 21.12.2023, both the petitioners who are 1/5
arrayed as A2 and A4 had been remanded to judicial custody. 4.This Court had granted interim bail by an order dated 12.03.2024 with condition that the 1st petitioner should execute a settlement deed in favour of the defacto complainant with respect to the property at Neelangari. It was stated as follows in paragraph Nos.14 and 15 of the order dated 12.03.2024:
"14.Sofar as the first petitioner is concerned, this Court is inclined to grant interim bail with condition that she must abide by the undertaking given in paragraph 3(b), extracted above, which is once again extracted for clarity: (b) I will execute a settlement deed to and in favour of Ms.Gautami Tadimala of all the place and parcel of vacant land to an extent of 9094 sq.ft. [which includes 50% of 10 feet x 400 feet and 50% of 14.6 x 74] pathway obtained through the Partition Deed dated 05.05.2023 registered as Document No.5864 of 2023 by a Sale Deed dated 14.10.2020 registered as Document No.5159 of 2020 at the Sub 2/5
Registrar Office Neelangarai.
15.The first petitioner may express intention to execute necessary documents and also execute such documents. She may convey that such decision either directly to the defacto complainant or through the investigating officer to the defacto complainant, and if there is an expression of complying with the said undertaking, proceed further and execute necessary documents. I am confident that the investigating officer will assist in registering any document. This would give a quietus to the entire issue.
5.But however, the respondent had also registered two further cases against the petitioners in Kancheepuram District, District Crime Branch in Crime No.17 of 2023 under Sections 406, 465, 468, 471, 506(i), 420 r/w 34 of IPC and they were formally arrested on 31.01.2024 by the DCB, Kancheepuram and bail had been granted in that particular case to the accused. There is yet another case in Thiruvannamalai District, District Crime Branch in Crime No.15 of 2023 under Sections 420 and 506(i) of IPC and the 1st petitioner was formally arrested on 18.01.2024 by the DCB, Thiruvannamalai and bail had been granted in 3/5
that case also by the Sessions Court.
6.Taking into consideration the fact that the 1st petitioner / A2 had not complied with the condition, the interim bail already granted to her stands cancelled and this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed insofar as the 1st petitioner / A2. It is to be noted that this Court had earlier granted bail to the 2nd petitioner / A4 on 12.03.2024. 22.04.2024 smv 4/5
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.
smv 22.04.2024 5/5