Murugesan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Eleventh day of March Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT THE HON`BLE MR JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.15499 of 2015 MURUGESAN ... PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT.

[CRIME NO. 7/2015] ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT SOLAI ... PETITIONER/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT/INTERVENER For Petitioner : M/S K.BAALASUNDHARAM Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.P.BALASUBRAMANI Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervener : MR.S.MAHENDRAPATHY Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police in Crime No.7 of 2015, on the file of the respondent police for offences under Sections 406,419, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, the petitioner is now before this Court seeking Anticipatory Bail. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the intervenor and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent.

3.On a reading of the FIR, it is the case of the de-facto complainant that his father Murugappan Chettiar had died on 08.09.1995 itself. Thereafter on 14.07.1998, the petitioner herrein has created a power of attorney, as if Murugappan Chettiyar has executed the same in favour of the petitioner and the same has been registered as Document No.15/1998 before the Sub Registrar Office, Annavasal, Pudukottai District and on the strength of the power of attorney, the petitioner dealt with the lands of the de-facto complainant.

4.The learned Government Advocate submits that apart from this case, the petitioner has involved in Crime No. 1 of 2010, 20 of 2014 and 108 of 2015 for similar offence.

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

5.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been granted anticipatory bail in those cases. In the considered opinion of this Court, that cannot be a good reason for this Court to grant anticipatory bail. Taking into consideration the nature of the allegations in the FIR and taking into consideration the gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

sd/- 11/03/2016 / 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, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT.

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

GJM/NGM/SS/AR-I-16.3.16-2p-3c

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.15499 of 2015 Date :11/03/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/