P.Thalavai v. State Rep.By
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Eighth day of August Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.11585 of 2016 1 P.THALAVAI 2 S.UTCHIMAGALI 3 S.PARVATHI 4 ESAKITHAI 5 P.M.KAMAL BATCHA 6 S.PABANASAM ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 6 Vs STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VEERAVANALLUR POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.
CRIME NO.112 OF 2016 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT P.RAMAIAH ... INTERVENE PETITIONER/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S J.PANDIDORAI Advocate For Respondent : MR.P.KANNITHEVAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervenor : M/S.S.R.A.RAMACHANDHRAN, Advocate 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.1 to 6, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 294(b), 323, 420, 423, 463, 465 and 506(ii) IPC, in Crime No.112 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the properties in question originally belonged to the father of the defacto complainant and the petitioners 1, 3 and 4. He died on 25.05.
1985, leaving behind eight legal heirs including the defacto complainant and the petitioners 1, 3 and 4. After the death of their father, the first petitioner was managing the property.
11.10.2010, bearing Document Nos.908/2010, 909/2010 and 911/2010. The petitioners 3 and 4 executed another settlement deed in favour of the first petitioner, dated 03.09.2014, bearing Document No.1089/2014. The first petitioner sold the property to the second petitioner by a sale deed, dated 11.12.2014. when the same was questioned by the defacto complainant, the first petitioner threatened him and abused him in filthy language. On complaint, case has been registered against the petitioners.
3.The case of the petitioners is that the properties in question originally belonged to the mother of the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 and the defacto complainant. She executed a settlement deed, dated 18.04.2003, in favour of the first petitioner and subsequently, she executed a settlement deed in favour of the petitioners 3 and 4, on 11.10.2010 and both the settlement deed were duly registered. Again the petitioners 3 and 4, who are the sisters of the first petitioner, executed a settlement deed in favour of the first petitioner on 03.09.2014. The first petitioner sold the property to the second petitioner. The defacto complainant suppressing the settlement deed executed by the mother, dated 18.04.2003, filed two civil suits in O.S.No.20 of 2015 on the file of the Sub Court, Ambasamudram, seeking for partition and O.S.No.25 of 2015 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Cheranmahadevi, seeking for permanent injunction.
4.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 and they have been falsely implicated in this case and prays for anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioners.
5.The learned counsel appearing for the Intervenor reiterated the averments made in the complaint and submitted that the defacto complainant has not filed any suit. One of the legal heirs has filed civil suit by impleading the defacto complainant as one of the defendants in the suit. He has further submitted that the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 in collusion with each other, fabricated the settlement deed in favour of the first petitioner and the first petitioner sold the property to the second petitioner and cheated the defacto complainant.
6.The learned learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the investigation is pending.
7.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the defacto complainant and the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 are brothers and sisters and transaction starts from the year 18.04.2003 and one of the legal heirs has filed the suits in O.S.Nos.20 and 25 of 2015, investigation is pending and also considering the fact that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not required, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, with certain conditions. Accordingly, they are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District, on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute 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 respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: (i) the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. (ii) the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. (iii) the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
(iv) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].
8.The Inspector of Police concerned is directed to send a compliance report to the office of the learned Government Advocate, as to whether the petitioners are complying with the conditions or not.
sd/- 08/08/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, CHERANMAHADEVI, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VEERAVANALLUR POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S J.PANDIDORAI Advocate SR.No.43065 +1. CC to M/S S.R.A.RAMACHANDHRAN, Advocate SR.No.42857
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.11585 of 2016 PS Date :08/08/2016 CSL/NGM-MP/SAR-III/12.08.2016: 3P/7C