Senthilkumar v. State Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Nineteenth day of November Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V.THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.20869 of 2021 1 SENTHILKUMAR [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] 2 ANANDHAJOTHI Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARAIKKAL TOWN POLICE STATION, KARAIKKAL.
(F.I.R.NO.204/2021) For Petitioner : M/S T. M.NAVEEN Advocate For Respondent : MR.V.BALAMURUGANE, Additional Public Prosecutor for Puducherry.
PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 34 & 420 of IPC in Cr.No.204 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners had illegally created a fabricated document in their name and sold it to the other persons. Hence, the respondent police registered a case as against the petitioners.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) raised objection by stating that first petitioner is the history sheeter. He further submits that he is habitually involved in the same kind of land grabbing cheating case in Karaikal region with the assistance of his wife A3/second petitioner herein had well knowledge about the status of the property and gained. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Heard both sides.
6.
On perusal of available records reveals that the petitioners are husband and wife and they sold the property to the others by creating fabricated documents. Apart from that, the first petitioner is having lot of previous cases which are similar in nature.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submissions made by both counsel and also the fact that there are many previous cases pending as against the first petitioner , this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 19/11/2021 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 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARAIKKAL TOWN POLICE STATION, KARAIKKAL.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PUDUCHERRY.
CC to M/S T. M.NAVEEN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.20869/2021 Date :19/11/2021 TA-02/12/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/