Muneer Basha v. The State Rep By Its,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Tenth day of June Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.13483 of 2022 MUNEER BASHA [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs 1 THE STATE REP BY ITS, [ RESPONDENTS] THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DHARMAPUR DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU.

2 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, EOU-V, EO-II, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION-HQ, CGO COMPLEX,LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI - 110003.

For Petitioner :M/S.ADITHYA VARADARAJAN Advocate For Respondent :MR.SRINIVASAN,Special Public Prosecutor FOR CBI CASES PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondents police for alleged offences punishable under Section 25

(1) r/w 14 of Antiquity and Art Treasures Act, 1972 and under Sections 120 B, 379 and 411 of IPC, in RC No.220 2022 E004 on the file of the second respondent, seeks anticipatory bail,

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner who was working as a Special Grade Marker at Sports Development Authority of Tamil Nadu for more than 31 years, due to covid-19 pandemic circumstances, suffered a heavy financial loss and he was advised by his few friends to sell "Yasin Sura" for good price, for that, he wanted to ascertain the market value of the "Yasin" and hence he sent his driver to Delhi to assess the actual market value. While so, the petitioner's driver was intercepted at his hotel room in New Delhi and "Yasin Sura" was recovered and seized by the second repondent police. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that false complaint has been given against the petitioner and he has nothing to do with the said allegations. He further submitted that the "Yasin Sura" which was seized by the second respondnet is only petitioner's ancestral property and not stolen property. He further submitted that Interstate Anticipatory bail may be granted to him to enable him to move the appropriate jurisdictional Court in Delhi for necessary relief.

4. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant inter-state interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner for a period of six weeks from today to enable him to move the concerned Court.

5. Accordingly, interim interstate anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner for a period of six weeks, on condition that the petitioner shall surrender before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Dharmapuri, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready and the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the said learned Magistrate. Further, within four weeks from the date of execution of bail bond, the petitioner shall approach the competent Court in New Delhi and seek appropriate relief.

-sd/- 10/06/2022 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, DHARMAPURI.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE DHARMAPURI [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DHARMAPUR DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU.

4 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, EOU-V, EO-II, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION HQ, CGO COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI - 110003.

5 THE SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+2CC to M/S.ADITHYA VARADARAJAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.No.8805 CRL OP.13483/2022 Date :10/06/2022 CSK 10/06/2022