Willander Bennatt Royan v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty Fourth day of August Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.15077 of 2021 1 WILLANDER BENNATT ROYAN [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED ] 2 CELINA ROYAN Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, W-29, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, AVADI, CHENNAI.

(CRIME NO.16/2021) For Petitioner : M/S.K.SUTHAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.C.E.PRATAP, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) 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 respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 406, 420, 506(i) of IPC in Cr.No.16 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant and the petitioner were lovers. It is alleged in the complaint that the petitioner suppressing the earlier marriage, had relationship with the defacto complainant. Believing the sweet words of the petitioner, the defacto complainant accepted to marry him.

Further the marriage was arranged by their parents and the petitioner with an ulterior motive to grab money from the defacto complainant asked her to give money to meet out the marriage expenditure. The defacto complainant also gave an amount for a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- by obtaining loan from the Bank. Later to her shock, she came to know about the petitioner through his friend that he was a already married man and begotten child. When she asked for return of money, she was threatened by the petitioner with dire consequences. Hence, the defacto complainant has lodged a police complaint before the respondent Police.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. However, on instructions, the learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that the petitioner, on his own volition, is ready and willing to pay the sum of Rs.3,50,000/- to the defacto complainant and also accepts to return the blank papers where it is alleged that the petitioner got the signature of the defacto complainant, without prejudice to his rights. On such deposit being made, the concerned Magistrate, after obtaining undertaking from the defacto complainant that if the petitioner succeeds in the case, the said amount would be refunded back to him, may disburse the amount to the defacto complainant.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is that he has received a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- from the defacto complainant and cheated by promising to marry her and hence strongly opposed for grant of anticipatory bail.

5.Considering the nature of the case and based on the undertaking given by the petitioner to deposit the amount, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate I, Poonamallee, on condition that 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

(a)if the petitioner failed to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled; (b)the petitioner shall make Demand Draft in favour of the defacto complainant for a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs and Fifty Thousand only) and shall return the signed blank papers to the defacto complainant, without prejudice to his defence before the trial Court and the concerned Magistrate, shall accept the sureties furnished by the petitioner on such deposit being made and proof filed by the petitioner;

(c)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; (d)the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

(e)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(f)the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(g)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]; and; (h)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

-sd/- 24/08/2021 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 NO.I, POONAMALLEE.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUVALLUR [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, W-29, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, AVADI, CHENNAI.

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+1CC to M/S.K.SUTHAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.8991 CRL OP.15077/2021 Date :24/08/2021 CSK 01/09/2021