C.Rajendran v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Seventh day of February Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL OP(MD) No.22652 of 2018 C.RAJENDRAN ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED No.2 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, SUBRAMANIAPURAM, TRICHY DISTRICT.

(IN CRIME NO.19/2018) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : MR.D.SENTHIL Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.SUYAMBULINGA BHARATHI, Government Advocate(Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offences punishable under Sections 417 and 420 IPC in Crime No.19 of 2018 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused persons are running a business in the name of Sri Angalaparameswari Real Estate, in which A1 and A3 are Managing Director and the Executive Director respectively. A1 executed a power of attorney [A2]. The defacto complainant purchased the property from A2. Thereafter, the defacto complainant came to know all the plots were sold to third parties. For which, the defacto complainant filed a complaint before the respondent police. 3.The learned counsel petitioner would submit that the petitioner did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he is innocent person. The petitioner is a power of attorney appointed by A1, who is the Managing Director of the Company. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) would submit that

the petitioner was in active participation in the execution of sale deed in the capacity of power of attorney. Therefore, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner himself executed a sale deed in favour of the defacto complainant, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed.

sd/- 07/02/2019 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, SUBRAMANIAPURAM, TRICHY DISTRICT.

2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to Mr.D.SENTHIL Advocate SR.No.2638

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.22652 of 2018 Date :07/02/2019 TK/PN/SAR-IV/22.02.2019/2P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/