Sangili Bawa@Mohammed Rabbani v. Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Tenth day of June Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.4939 of 2015 SANGILI BAWA @ MOHAMMED RABBANI BAWA ... PETITIONER/ SOLE ACCUSED Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, DINDIGUL.(CRIME NO.57 OF 2014) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.N.SATHISH BABU Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.V.RAJARAJAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as sole accused, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 506(i) IPC in Crime No. 57 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.One Mohamed Abdul Jafar lodged a complaint alleging that the accused had received more than Rs.one corre and sixty six lakhs, for sale of one share in Subramaniya Engineering College. Subsequently, he cheated.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the defacto complainant is working as a Teacher and he was receiving Rs.27,000/- as salary from the school and on 04.12.2010, he gave a letter to Islamic Trust seeking financial assistance of Rs.5 lakhs and in the letter he has stated that he was suffering financially. The learned counsel further submitted that his wife Subha Manohari gave a similar letter on 25.03.2011 to the Trust. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. 4.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) submitted that the accused had received Rs.1,66, 82,500/- by cash from the defato comlainant on many occasions assuring to include him as one of the Trustees in Subramaniya College of Engineering but he did not keep his words. The learned Government Advocate further submitted that investigation reveals that there was some money transaction between the accused and the defacto complainant. However, considering the allegations https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

levelled against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 5.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Dindigul, 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.

6. 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/- 10/06/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.2,DINDIGUL.

2.DO THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DINDIGUL. 3.THE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

4.THE INSPECTOR O F POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH,DINDIGUL.

+1. CC to M/S.N.SATHISH BABU Advocate SR.No.29729

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.4939 of 2015 Date :10/06/2015 RG.12.06.2015 2P.6C.

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