← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP/7436/2020granted

Ravi v. State Rep By

2020-05-08Honourable Mr Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

08.05.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.OP.No.7436 of 2020 Ravi

...Petitioner

Vs State rep. By

...Respondent

The Inspector of Police Ranipet Police Station Ranipet, Ranipet District.

(Crime No.380 of 2012) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C., to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending investigation in Crime No.380 of 2012 on the file of the respondent police. For petitioner : Mr.S.Amarnath For respondent : Mr.M. Mohammed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on07.04.2020 for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 506 (i) of IPC in Crime No.380 of 2012 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant lodged a complaint on 24.06.2012, alleging that he has purchased a property situated in Vanaganoor Village, R.K.Pet Taluk, Tiruvallur District on 16.10.2008. Therafterthe defacto complainant executed General Power of Attorneyon 04.12.2008 in favour of the 1st accused, to develop the property. Further, the defacto complainant cancelled the General Power of Attorney on 13.03.2009 and that the 1st accused along with other accused persons, sold out the said property on the very same day, with the help of the petitioner herein, who is the document writer. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the case is of the year 2012. The 1st accused approached this Court for anticipatory bail in Crl.OP.No.10905 of 2013 and this Court has granted the same by its order dated 26.04.2013. Since the petitioners could not be able to furnish the sureties within the stipulated time prescribed in the anticipatory bail, this Court has cancelled the anticipatory bail by its order dated 13.03.2020 in Crl.OP.No.28093 of 2019. Subsequently the petitioner herein was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 07.04.2020. He further informed that the defacto complainant has filed a civil suit in O.S.No.25 of 2016 on the file of the learned I Additional District Judge, Tiruvallur, and the same is pending. As far as the petitioner herein is concerned, he is being the document writer, nothing to do with the crime as alleged by the prosecution. He further informed that he is not having any bad antecedents and pleased to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner is arrayed as A5 and he is a document writer. The defacto complainant originally executed the General Power of Attorney in favour of the 1st accused. Thereafter on 13.03.2009, it was cancelled vide registered cancellation deed and on the very same day, the 1st accused along with other accused persons, including the petitioner herein had executed the sale deed to various persons towards the said property. Further, the petitioner herein has prepared the documents for General Power of Attorney as well as the sale deed in favour of others. Thereby he committed serious offence and hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner. 5.

Considering the above facts and circumstances and taking into consideration the nature of allegations against the petitioner in the FIR and taking note of the fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 07.04.2020, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a]the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) to the Chief Minister Public Relief Fund, and on such deposit the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing his own bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) before the Superintendent of the concerned prison; [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police from 15.06.2020 to 26.06.2020, at 10.

[c] the petitioner shall not leave Tamil Nadu during the interregnum period;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate / Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229 A IPC.

6. With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is ordered.

-sd/- 08/05/2020 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 PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE VELLORE.

2 THE CHIEF MINISTER PUBLIC RELIEF FUND, TAMILNADU.

3 THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, THIRUVALLUR.

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE RANIPET POLICE STATION RANIPET, RANIPET DISTRICT.

6 THE OFFICER INCHARGE SUB JAIL, WALAJAH.

CC to MR.S.AMARNATH, Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.7436/2020 Date :08/05/2020 TA-11/06/2020