Madras High CourtCRL OP/15521/2021dismissed

V.Kanagaraj Kumar v. Inspector Of Police

2021-08-31Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Thirty First day of August Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.15521 of 2021 1 V.KANAGARAJ KUMAR [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED ] 2 K.KAVITHA Vs INSPECTOR OF POLICE [ RESPONDENT ] CHENNAI CRIME BRANCH, TEAM NO. 17A, VEPERY, CCB-II, CHENNAI.

CRIME NO. 123 OF 2021.

For Petitioner : M/S. S.AMBIGAPATHI Advocate For Respondent : MR. A.GOPINATH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervenor : MR. S.R.SAMIDURAI Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- (The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468 and 471 r/w 34 and 109 of IPC in Crime No.123 of 2021 seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant's father Ponnurangam owned a property and the said property was purchased from one Partha Sarathy in the year 1964. Thereafter, A1 impersonated the defacto complainant's father to execute the settlement deed in his favour claiming as only legalheir in the year 2020 on the file of SRO,Velacherry.

Thereafter, A1 had executed a sale deed in favour of A5 and A6 on 03.12.2020 and again A5 and A6 mortgaged the said property in the ICICI Bank and obtained a loan for a sum of Rs.70,44,000/- and when the said fact was known to the defacto complainant, he had lodged a complaint before the Law Enforcing Agency.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution, infact, he is an innocent purchaser and he has purchased the property from A1 to A3. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that the property owned by the defacto complainant which was grabbed by the petitioners along with A1 to A3. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of bail to the petitioners.

5. Considering the submissions made on either side and also considering the gravity of the offence committed by the petitioners that the petitioners said to have involved in malpractices and producing bogus records, they obtained patta and obtained loan from the bank, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 31/08/2021 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 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENNAI CRIME BRANCH, TEAM NO. 17A, VEPERY, CCB-II, CHENNAI.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S. S.AMBIGAPATHI Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.15521/2021 Date :31/08/2021 INBA-06/10/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/