M.Mani @ Perumal Chetty v. The State By Its

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the First day of April Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Dr Justice G. JAYACHANDRAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.7183 of 2022 1 M.MANI @ PERUMAL CHETTY [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED ] 2 M.VENKATESAN 3 M.MADHU Vs THE STATE BY ITS [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRACH, KRISHNAGIRI CRIME NO.02 OF 2022 For Petitioner : M/S.T.AROCKIA DASS Advocate For Respondent : M/S.S.SANTHOSH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 468 and 420 of IPC, in Crime No.02 of 2022, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The complaint has been registered against these petitioners alleging that they have manipulated the document and grabbed the land of the defacto complainant. However, the learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that regarding the pathway measuring around 235 sq.ft there was a dispute between the petitioners and the defacto complainant. The Trial Court has declared that the said pathway belongs to the defacto complainant. However, when the larger extent of the property was sold to the petitioners, the pathway was also included and this was brought to the notice of the petitioners and

the petitioners have prayed to rectify the deed, however, the Registrar has raised certain objections and hence they could not rectify the extent of the land excluding the pathway.

3. While so, the defacto complainant being a practicing advocate, has given a false complaint as if the petitioners have grabbed the land of the defacto complainant. Further, stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that there is a title dispute regarding the pathway measuring around 235 sq.ft and in the registration of the land, seeks bail apprehending arrest by the respondent police.

4. Considering the nature of the complaint and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court is of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required and if they co-operate with investigation and rectify the error which has crept in the title deed document is suffice to redress the grievance of the defacto complainant.

5. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthangarai, on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only), with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate, failing which the anticipatory bail shall stand cancelled and on further condition that:

(a) the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Court concerned may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b) the petitioners shall report before the Investigating Officer daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. (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]; and;

(f) if the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

-sd/- 01/04/2022 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 JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, UTHANGARAI, KRISHNAGIRI.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE KRISHNAGIRI. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRACH, KRISHNAGIRI.

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+1 CC to M/S.DASS AND VISWA ASSOCIATES Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO. 5031 CRL OP.7183/2022 Date :01/04/2022 RW 06/04/2022