Udaiyar v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Third day of April Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.6925 of 2015 UDAIYAR ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.3 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, KANNIYAKUMARI DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO. 77 OF 2014) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT M.B.SHAKKIR ... INTERVENOR For Petitioner : M/S.P.R.PRITHIVIRAJ Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.V.RAJARAJAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervenor : MR.R.MAHESWARAN, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as A3 apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under sections 465, 468, 471 and 420 IPC r/w 34 of IPC, in Crime No.77 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant is doing business of selling used cars and on 17.07.2014, A1 and A2 came to the house of the de-facto complainant and offered a Toyoto Innova Car bearing registration No.

TN-72-AM-9030 and they also shown the Registration Certificate and received Rs.6,70,000/- and further they promised to give the service book, duplicate key and Insurance Certificate on the next day. However, they did not come back and on suspicion, the de-facto complainant found that the documents are forged. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has nothing to do with the alleged transaction between the de-facto complainant and A1 and A2 and A1 was already arrested and released on bail. It is further submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he is ready to abide by any condition, that may be https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ imposed by this court.

4.Mr.R.Maheswaran, learned counsel for the intervenor/de-facto complainant submitted that the petitioner is a kingpin for the alleged illegal transaction and the petitioner has adopted the same modus operandi for procuring used cars from different parts of Tamil Nadu and after changing the registration numbers, they have sold the used cars by creating documents, RC books etc.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) submitted that in this case, to find out the truth, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much necessary.

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the allegations made against the petitioner, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, this petition is dismissed.

sd/- 23/04/2015 / 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, KANNIYAKUMARI DISTRICT. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.6925 of 2015 Date :23/04/2015 PA/04.05.2015/2P/3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/