Ravi v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty Third day of January Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs.Justice J.NISHA BANU CRL OP(MD) No.17646 of 2017 RAVI ... PETITIONER / A1 Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ANTI LAND GRABBING SPECIAL CELL, THANJAVUR DISTRICT.
CR NO. 30/2016. ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.K.MALATHI Advocate For Respondent : MR.SUYAMBULINGA BHARATHI, Government 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 Accused No.1 in Crime No.30 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 423, 465, 468, 471, 120(b) and 506 (ii) IPC and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) for the respondent/State.
3.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner colluding with the other accused, including the Government officials, are alleged to have grabbed the property of the defacto complainant by creating forged documents and also forging the signature of the defacto complainant, after affixing her photo.
4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that due to previous enmity, the present false complaint has been lodged by the defacto complainant and the petitioner is
innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged in the complaint and therefore, he may be granted anticipatory bail.
5. The learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) on instructions submitted that the petitioner colluded with Government officials grabbed the property and hence, his earlier anticipatory petition was dismissed by this Court in Crl.O.P(MD)No.22780 of 2016 vide order dated 30.06.2017.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that though the earlier anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court as early as on 30.06.2017, the respondent police had not taken any steps to arrest the petitioner Therefore, in order to facilitate the investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Orathanadu, Thanjavur District and on his 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 10.30 a.m., until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.
7. 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.
8. Considering the fact that the case is of the year 2016, the respondent police is directed to complete the investigation and file a final report, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. sd/- 23/01/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
RM TO 1 THE DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE , ORATHANADU, THANJAVUR DISTRICT
2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THANJAVUR DISTRICT AT KUMBAKONAM 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ANTI LAND GRABBING SPECIAL CELL, THANJAVUR DISTRICT. 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S.K.MALATHI Advocate SR.No.1159 GJM/CM/VR/SAR-2-30.1.18-3P-6C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.17646 of 2017 Date :23/01/2018