Kalidoss v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Eighth day of September Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.16987 of 2015 KALIDOSS ... PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, RAMANATHAPURAM CR.NO. 44 OF 2015 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT R.MALARVIZHI ... INTERVENOR For Petitioner : M/S K.R.LAXMAN Advocate For Respondent : MRS.S.PRABHA Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For intervenor : M/S.R.GOWRISHANKAR Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is the sole accused, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 468, 471 and 420 of Indian Penal Code in Crime No.44 of 2015, on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. According to the defacto complainant, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram, the petitioner herein has produced a copy of the sale deed correcting the width of the property as '16 feet' instead of '15-1/4 feet'.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the intervenor are neighbours and in respect of boundary dispute, an issue was pending before the Revenue Divisional Officer and the neighbour has also filed a Writ Petition before this Court in W.P.(MD)No.14729 of 2015 for cancellation of the building plan approval. At her instigation, a false complaint was given against the petitioner.

4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the intervenor vehemently opposed granting of anticipatory bail to the petitioner contending that the defacto complainant is a quasi judicial officer, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

before whom, the accused has produced a false document and, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for anticipatory bail. The learned counsel for the intervenor also produced a typed-set containing the sale deed.

5. The Court heard the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) also.

6. Considering the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, Ramanathapuram and 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 learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

8. The petitioner 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/- 08/09/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I,RAMANATHAPURAM 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,RAMANATHAPURAM 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH,RAMANATHAPURAM 4 THE ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S K.R.LAXMAN Advocate SR.No.53009

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.16987 of 2015 Date :08/09/2015 AA/10.09.2015/2p-6c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/