Pattan v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty Fourth day of October Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice S.VAIDYANATHAN CRL OP(MD) No.17311 of 2016 PATTAN ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.I Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY , THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, (ANTI LAND GRABBING SPECIAL CELL), THOOTHUKUDI, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT, CRIME NO.35 OF 2015 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.A.THIRUVADIKUMAR 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 :- Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 419, 465, 468, 471 and 420 of I.P.C., in Crime No.35 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, the petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking anticipatory bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent police.
3. It is seen that on 15.09.2016, this Court had granted interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is willing to cancel the power of attorney, that A2 and A3 appeared before the Registrar Office and he is not aware of the fabrication of documents said to have been created by A2 and A3. He would further submit that he has already paid the money for registration of power of attorney, which is reflected in the power and that A2 and A3 are willing to return the same. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
5. From the complaint, it appears that there was a forged document said to have been created for the purpose of registration of the property in question. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court may direct a copy of the order to be marked to the Sub Registrar Office, so that, no further encumbrance could be created on the property by any one, as there is a civil dispute pending in C.S.No.108 of 2016 before the Principal District Munsif Court, Tuticorin. It appears that after the demise of the defacto complainant's father, on 22.02.1990, the fabrication of documents had taken place.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the interim anticipatory bail already granted by this Court is made absolute with a condition that the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders. sd/- 24/10/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE , (SPECIAL COURT FOR LAND GRABBING CASES), THOOTHUKUDI. 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THOOTHUKUDI. 3 THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT MUNSIF, TUTICORIN. 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, (ANTI LAND GRABBING SPECIAL CELL), THOOTHUKUDI, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.
5 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECTUOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
Copy to:
The Sub Registrar Office, Thoothukudi.
+1. CC to M/S.A.THIRUVADIKUMAR Advocate SR.No.63450 AKV CSL/PV/SAR-I/14.11.2016: 2P/8C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.17311 of 2016 Date :24/10/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/