This criminal original petition for bail was dismissed. The Hon'ble Court held that prima facie cases of cheating and threats to life were made out. Releasing the petitioners feared to involve witness tampering and threats to the complainant's life, regardless of gender.
The Criminal Original Petition No.2946 of 2018 seeking bail is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Thursday, the Eighth day of February Two Thousand Eighteen
PRESENT
The Hon`ble Dr Justice G. JAYACHANDRAN
CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.2946 of 2018
1 S.KUMARI, [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED ] 2 S.NIRMALA,
Vs
STATE REP. BY, [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, D-5, SALAVAKKAM POLICE STATION, KANCHEEPURAM DISTRICT. CR.NO.20 OF 2018
For Petitioner : MR. YASHODVARADHAN, Senior Counsel for
For Respondent : MR. C. IYYAPPA RAJ, Addl. Public Prosecutor
PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-
The petitioners/A1 and A2 who were arrested on 20.01.2018 by the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 420, 143, 342, 294(b), 352 and 506(i) of IPC in Crime No.20 of 2018 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.
there was a balance of Rs.4 crores due from the buyers. When the defacto complainant and his cousin Mr.Thenthamilselvan executed the sale deed, one Magendira Salani[A7] and Sridhar(deceased) promised them that as soon as the sale deed is registered, the balance amount of Rs.4 crores will be paid to them. When the defacto complainant went to the house of Magendira Salani [A7] to collect the balance sale consideration of Rs.4 cores, he did not pay but threatened them saying Sridhar group are very dangers people, if they demand the balance, they may even eliminate them and their family. Thus, out of agreed sale consideration of Rs.15,80,00,000/-, only Rs.11,80,00,000/- has been paid. When the balance sale consideration of Rs.4 crores demanded by the defacto complainant, the purchasers/A1 and A2 (petitioners herein) and their henchmen threatened them with dire consequences.
abroad. Despite look out circular and Red Corner Notice issued to the said Sridhar, he could not be secured by the Police alive. The defacto complainant, who had been under the constant threat at the hands of the petitioners and his family members, had come out of fear only after the demise of Sridhar and the case being under investigation, releasing the petitioners on bail is strongly opposed. The petitioners being relative of the deceased Sridhar got the property registered in their names paying part sale consideration and on demand of the balance sale consideration, they threatened the complainant with dire consequences. Hence, the case has been registered based on the complaint given by one Lakshmanamoorthi. The case bears wider ramification. These petitioners being the beneficiaries of holding the proceeds of the crime their judicial custody is essential or else they may tamper the witness.
termed as imaginary fear. On reading of the complaint and hearing the submission made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State, this Court is of the opinion releasing the petitioners herein is not conducive to the protection of the witnesses, who are likely to be examined in this case. Therefore, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
-sd/-
08/02/2018
This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned
TRUE COPY
Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO
1 STATE REP. BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, D-5, SALAVAKKAM POLICE STATION, KANCHEEPURAM DISTRICT.
2 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL , CHENNAI
3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
+1 CC to M/S.R.VINAYAGA VISHNU Advocate on payment of necessary charges Sr.No.2682
MD: 09/02/2018
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to petitioners accused of cheating and threatening witnesses in a property transaction case.
Whether there is a prima facie case of cheating involving threats to life and tampering with evidence beyond a mere civil dispute.
Whether the petitioners' female gender entitles them to bail as a matter of right.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
S.KUMARI
S.NIRMALA
STATE
G. JAYACHANDRAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
