Muthukamachi v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Seventh day of January Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.23833 of 2015 1 MUTHUKAMACHI 2 THIYAGARAJAN ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 3 AND 4 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE LAND GRABBING CELL, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT, CRIME NO.59 OF 2015. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S R.MURUGAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.ANBARASAN,Govt. 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 Accused Nos.3 to 4, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 419, 420, 423, 465, 467, 468, 471, 506(i) r/w Section 120 (b) IPC, in Crime No.59 of 2015, on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant is the owner of the property in question. One Subramanian, the father of the petitioners herein, without having any title to the property, executed a sale deed in favour of Atma Agro Farming Private Limited/A2. When the same was questioned by the de-facto complainant, the petitioners threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint has been given by the de-facto complainant against the petitioners for the offences stated above.
3. The case of the petitioners is that they are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The allegation made against the petitioners is that they are only threatened the de-facto complainant.
4. Heard the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent and he has submitted that the petitioners threatened the de-facto complainant with dire consequences.
5. Considering the 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, Special Court for Land Grabbing cases, Ramanathapuram, and on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
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 on further condition that the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m., until further orders. The petitioners shall comply with the conditions 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/- 07/01/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ,SPECIAL COURT FOR LAND GRABBING CASES, RAMANATHAPURAM.
2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,LAND GRABBING CELL,RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT 3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECTUOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S R.MURUGAN Advocate SR.No.1176 smn2 CSL/NGM-SS/SAR-II/11.01.2016/2p/5c
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.23833 of 2015 Date :07/01/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/