Allowed

Lekshman v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC18 Nov 2020CRL OP(MD)/12789/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a cheating case involving financial fraud. The court allowed bail citing the resolution of dues by the first accused as a mitigating factor, subject to strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to execution of bond with two sureties, daily reporting, and specific conduct conditions.

Lekshman Vs The Inspector of Police — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.12789 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 18/11/2020 PRESENT

¶5

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶6

CRL OP(MD). No.12789 of 2020

¶7

Lekshman ... Petitioner/Accused No.4

¶8

Vs The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Trichy District. (Crime No.22 of 2019). ... Respondent/Complainant

¶9

For Petitioner : M/s.M.Pitchai Muthu, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

¶10

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Section 438 of Cr.P.C

¶11

PRAYER :-

¶12

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.22 of 2019 on the file of the Respondent Police.

¶13

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶14

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate(Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent.

¶15

2.The petitioner apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 417 and 420 of I.P.C., in Crime No.22 of 2019 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶16

3.The case of the prosecution is that A1 is a car selling broker. The defacto complainant had purchased a jeep from A1 to the tune of Rs.2,95,000/-. Thereafter, so as to get NOC for the vehicle, A1 got original RC book of the vehicle and original TAX invoice from the defacto complainant. When the defacto complainant noticed that there is an engine problem in the car, he asked for https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ repayment or a new car from the first accused. As of now, A1 has

¶17

1/3

¶18

CRL OP(MD). No.12789 of 2020

¶19

not returned the same to the defacto complainant. Hence, the complaint.

¶20

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case.

¶21

5.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) brought to the notice of this Court that A1 has already been released on bail and before the Principal Sessions Judge, Trichy, the accused gave an undertaking that he will settle the dues to the defacto complainant.

¶22

6.May that be so, this Court is of the considered opinion that when bail was granted to A1, there is no other reason to deny anticipatory bail to A4. Further, the accused have promised that he will settle the issue. This being the factum, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶23

7.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Trichy, on condition that the petitioner shall execute 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 respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

¶24

(a)the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

¶25

(b)the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily morning at 09.00 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

¶26

(c)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶27

(d)the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶28

(e)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5560]; and;

¶29

2/3

¶30

CRL OP(MD). No.12789 of 2020

¶31

(f)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

¶32

sd/18/11/2020 / TRUE COPY / / /2020 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶33

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶34

¶35

THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.VI, TRICHY. 2. -DO- THORUGH: THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TRICHY.

¶36

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, TRICHY DISTRICT. 4. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶37

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12789 of 2020 Date :18/11/2020

¶38

RMI

¶39

SRS/AKM/SAR-III/23.11.2020/3P/5C

¶40

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶41

3/3

Lekshman v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lekshman v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Subramanian, Vs Additional Director General of

Ramesh Vs The Inspector of Police

M.Angayarkanni Vs The Inspector of Police

Seenivasan Vs The Inspector of Police

Parthiban Vs The Inspector of Police

Jahubar Ali @ Jafar Ibrahim Vs The Inspector of Police