M.Lakshmi Ammal v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twenty Second day of April Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.7334 of 2015 1 M.LAKSHMI AMMAL 2 K.PUSHPAVALLI 3 K.KUMARAN 4 K.MANIKANDAN ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT, (CRIME NO.12 OF 2015) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.S.VANCHINATHAN 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 petitioners, who are arrayed A1 to A4 apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under sections 120(B), 406, 420, 468 and 471 of IPC, in Crime No.12 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the accused had sold the property to the de-facto complainant without getting proper consent from the other co-owners and without effecting partition of the family properties.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the de-facto complainant wanted to purchase the property and on the basis of the oral agreement, she paid Rs.3,50,000/- as advance and also obtained a power of attorney in the name of one Ravindran and thereafter without paying the balance sale consideration, sold the property and therefore, the first petitioner lodged a complaint against the de-facto complainant and the same was registered in Crime No.348 of 2014.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.Heard the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent and he has submitted that A1 without

proper title over the property had sold the same to the de-facto complainant and the investigation is almost over. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the nature of the allegation made against the petitioners, 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 No.1, Sivagangai and on 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 appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders. The petitioners shall comply with the condition 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/- 22/04/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

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

+1. CC to M/S.S.VANCHINATHAN Advocate SR.No.21036

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.7334 of 2015 Date :22/04/2015 NA/24/04/2015/P2/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/