Saravanan v. State Rep By

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.

The petitioners/A1 to A5 seeks anticipatory bail in Crime No.412 of 2023 registered by the respondent Police for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 465, 468, 471 and 420 of IPC.

2. It is stated that the defacto complainant is the mother of the first petitioner.

3. It is the case of the prosecution that the first petitioner, had taken advantage of the knowledge of the defacto complainant only of Telugu language and ostensibly taken her to the Sub Registrar office as if a power of attorney is to be executed over the property and had executed as settlement deed in favour of the first petitioner. Subsequently, the first petitioner had also mortgaged the property and had received a sum of Rs.36/- lakhs. There are four other daughters for the defacto complainant.

4. It is with much dismay that I record that the petitioner stands as 1/3

an accused before this Court and had the temerity to bring the defacto complainant before the Court. It is clearly shows that he still exercises control and is in a position to influence her.

5. In view of the particular fact, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

6. The Inspector of Police, P-5, M.K.B.Nagar Police Station, Chennai is directed to be present before this Court physically on 19.03.2024 at 2.15 p.m. to report about taking into custody, Saravannan/A1, Gurumoorthy/A4 and Abdul Rahman/A3, failing which, strictures would be passed against the Inspector of Police.

07.03.2024 rjr 2/3

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.

rjr 07.03.2024 3/3