Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/2083/2018dismissed

Ramasamy, v. The Inspector Of Police,

2018-02-09Honourable Mr Justice R. Pongiappan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Ninth day of February Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL OP(MD) No.2083 of 2018 RAMASAMY ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED Vs STATE REP.BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, ANTI LAND GRABBING CELL, IN CR.NO.8 OF 2018, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.M.SUBASH BABU Advocate For Respondent : M/S.A.ROBINSON, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner/A8, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 471, 473 and 120(b) of IPC, in Crime No.8 of 2018, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the first accused in this case tried to register a reformed deed after committing forgery in the earlier document pertaining to the rectification deed. Hence, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent police.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner is only the attesting witness and pleads for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate(Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the investigation is still pending.

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

5.The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side are considered.

6. It is alleged that during the time of occurrence, the first accused in this case tried to register a rectification document, after committing forgery in the earlier document, pertaining to the rectification deed. Further, It is alleged that the first accused committed the offence and filed a document before this Court in W.P.(MD)No.19062/2016. The document, which required for registration, was attested by this petitioner, who is the 8th accused in the alleged offence. As of now, the other seven accused in this case are not arrested, being the Sub Registrar, the defacto complainant has lodged the complaint.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court comes to the conclusion that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for completing the investigation. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

sd/- 09/02/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, ANTI LAND GRABBING CELL, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.2083 of 2018 Date :09/02/2018 PK/RR-CSL/SAR-1/20.02.2018 : 2P/3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/