R.Abdul Rahman v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty Second day of June Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.11145 of 2015 1 R.ABDUL RAHMAN 2 A.DURAIRAJ ... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE WEST POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR, (CRIME NO.489 OF 2015) ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT For Petitioner :MR.N.SUNDARESAN,ADVOCATE FOR M/S.SUN ASSOCIATES Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.V.RAJARAJAN, Government Advocate(crl.side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as A4 and A3 apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under sections 147, 448, 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.489 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the accused have gone to the office of the de-facto complainant and obtained an undertaking affidavit by force at the knife point.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the de-facto complainant was running a Real Estate Business in the name and style of KARPAGA VIRUTCHAGAM ASSET PROMOTORS PRIVATE LTD and all the accused were working as agents and the accused have collected more than Rs.23,00,000/- from the customers and after collecting huge amount, the de-facto complainant vacated the office at Aruppukottai and set up another office at Virudhunagar and when the petitioners approached the de-facto complainant to sell the plots to the customers, a false complaint was given by him implicating the petitioners in this case.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioners and the other accused are involved in Real Estate Business and at the knife point, they https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

obtained the undertaking affidavit from the de-facto complainant. It is further submitted that the petitioners have no bad antecedents. 5.Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

6.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Aruppukkottai and on each of them executing 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 learned Magistrate concerned and the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

7.The petitioners shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed.

sd/- 22/06/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,ARUPPUKKOTTAI.

2.THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE VIRUDHUNAGAR AT SRIVILLIPUTHUR.

3.THE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

4.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE WEST POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR.

+1. CC to M/S.SUN ASSOCIATES Advocate SR.No.32695

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.11145 of 2015 Date :22/06/2015 RG.24.06.2015 2P/6C.

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