Bright Singh v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Twenty Fourth day of July Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.14114 of 2015 BRIGHT SINGH ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DCB/ANTI LAND GRABBING SPECIAL CELL, NAGERCOIL, KANYAKUMARI DT, CRIME NO.48/2015 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.R.RUSEEL RAJ Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.V.RAJARAJAN,Govt.Advocate PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as A1 in Crime No.48 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 25.06.2015 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 of I.P.C., and hence, seeks bail. 2.According to the de-facto complainant, the first accused sold three cents of land by a registered sale deed dated 18.03.2011 and subsequently, he encroached and constructed a house under the Chief Minister's Pasumai Veedu Scheme obtaining subsidy from the Government. 3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a illiterate man and he wanted to borrow money from the de-facto complainant in the year 2011 and under the guise of getting promissory note, the de-facto complainant got a signature in the sale deed. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side)would submit that A2 is the Block Development Officer and A3 is the President of Panchayat Union and with the help of A2 and A3, the petitioner/A1 attempt to grab the property of the de-facto complainant. He further submitted that A2 and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ A3 are still absconding.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail on the following conditions.

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on 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 Special Judicial Magistrate, Special Court for Land Grabbing Cases Tirunelveli and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m., until further orders. sd/- 24/07/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 SPECIAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SPECIAL COURT FOR LAND GRABBING CASES, TIRUNELVELI.

2 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON,PALAYAMKOTTAI.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DCB/ANTI LAND GRABBING SPECIAL CELL, NAGERCOIL, KANYAKUMARI DT, THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S.R.RUSEEL RAJ Advocate SR.No.41073

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.14114 of 2015 Date :24/07/2015 PA/SJW/24.07.2015/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/