B.Panjabakesan v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20/06/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP(MD). No.10971 of 2023 B.Panjabakesan ... Petitioner/Accused Rank not known Vs The State represented by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police Station(Algsc), Trichy District Crime No.7 of 2023..
... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.Arunraj K, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.439 of Cr.P.C.
PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.07 of 2023 on the file of the Respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner /A2 who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.05.2023 for the offences under sections 419,420,467,468,471 and 120(B) of IPC in Crime No.7 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 24.06.1985 the defacto complainant purchased a vacant sire and he is in possession of the same and in the first week of August 2022 when the defacto complainant went to the place some persons were fixing new fence in that place and when it was questioned by the defacto complainant they told that the place belongs to one Prady, who is the first accused and when the defacto complainant applied for EC it was learnt that on 18.07.2022 the fourth accused impersonating himself as a defacto complainant by forging the documents of the defacto complainant and sold the properties to first accused and the second and third accused signed in that document as witness. The further https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
allegation is that on 23.04.2022 the first accused with the help of the above said persons lodged forged complaint before the Manaparai Police Station stating that the original title documents of the above said property was misplaced by giving paper publication with the help of fourth accused and obtained a forged document and registered the sale deed in favour of the first accused, hence the case.
3. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the First Information Report.
4. It is seen that there are totally five accused in this case and the petitioner herein is arrayed as A2.Further the petitioner also involved in four similar cases and he is the master mind behind the entire crime. He had set up A1 and impersonating himself as defacto complainant had executed sale deed in favour of A2. A4 and A5 stood as witnesses. Further there is a proposal to detain the petitioner under Act.14 of 1982, hence this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
5. In the result, the petition stands dismissed. sd/- 20/06/2023 / TRUE COPY / /06/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
AAV TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH POLICE STATION(ALGSC), TRICHY DISTRICT 2 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL JAIL, TRICHY.
3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.10971 of 2023 Date :20/06/2023 SS/BUC/26/06/2023/2P/4C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis