Thangarathinaraj @ Thangaraj v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 18/03/2020 PRESENT The Hon`ble MR.Justice RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN Thangarathinaraj @ Thangaraj ... Petitioner/Accused No.9 Vs State represented by the Inspector of Police, Surandai Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

(In Crime No.66 of 2020) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ponraj Advocate.

For Respondent :Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side).

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- for Anticipatory bail in Crime No.66 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 465, 467, 468, 471 and 420 of I.P.C., in Crime No.66 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant namely, Balu, who is working as Village Administrative Officer, at Surandai Village, alleged in his complaint that the Government having a promboke land in Survey No.635/2 in Surandai Village. Subsequently, the said land was given to Police Department vide Veerakeralam Tahsildar Office's proceeding on 16.02.2004. In these circumstances, the first accused made a forged General Power document to A-2 for the said Survey No.635/2, vide document 1/3

No.43/2019, dated 10.01.2019, on the file of the Sub Registrar Office, Vasuthevanallur. Thereafter, the second accuse sold 50 cents to third accused in the said survey number vide Document No.2935/2019, dated 31.12.2019, on the file of the Sub Register Office, Vasuthevanallur. Hence, the case.

3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that he is only an attesting witness to the alleged forgery document and he is no way connected with the offence.

5.The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the State submitted that the land in question is the Government promboke in the year 2004 and the same was allotted to the Police Department. The first accused, in connivance with A-7, who was working as Junior Assistant in the Sub Registrar Office, Vasuthevanallur, though the property is out of jurisdiction, has registered a general power of attorney in favour of A-3 while A-2 created the sale deed in favour of the A-3, who is none other than the son of A-2. Furthermore, A-7 colluded with all the witnesses and created the document as if the property belongs to A-1 and thereby embezzled the property of the Government and the matter is under investigation. He further submitted that A-7 has already moved an anticipatory bail in CrlOP (MD) No.3453 of 2020 and the same was dismissed by this Court on 10.03.2020.

6.Considering the rival submissions and nature and gravity of the offences and the preliminary stage of the investigation and also taking note of the fact that the petitioner has involved in the entire episode, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. sd/- 18/03/2020 / TRUE COPY / / /2020 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

2/3

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SURANDAI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S.P.PONRAJ,Advocate,SR.No.5422, DATED ON 17.3.2020.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.4811 of 2020 Date :18/03/2020 ME/JC/SAR 3/23.03.2020/3P/4C 3/3