Allowed

Eagambaram v. the State Rep by

Madras HC28 Nov 2023CRL OP/24479/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner secured as an accused in a cheating case involving investment fraud, subject to conditions including monetary deposit, sureties, daily police reporting, and prohibition of absconding or tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail was granted on conditions including deposit of Rs. 1,50,000, execution of a bond with sureties, daily appearance before police, and adherence to conduct rules.

Eagambaram Vs the State Rep by — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

¶2

Crl.O.P.No24479 of 2023 and Crl.MP.No.17985 of 2023

¶3

The petitioner/A2 in Crime No.10 of 2023 registered under Sections 406, 420 and 506 (ii) IPC seeks anticipatory bail.

¶4

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent.

¶5

3.It is the case of the prosecution that the de facto complainant was a friend of the 1^st accused. The 1^st accused had insisted the de facto complainant to make an investment in a business by constituting a Partnership Firm. The de facto complainant also agreed. She had then given the title deeds of her immovable property for raising funds. The 1^st accused had received a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- from the de facto complainant. The accused had also received jewels from the de facto complainant. It is stated that the petitioner herein acting as power of attorney agent, had however sold the property for a total sale consideration of Rs.6,00,000/- to a third party. This has necessitated lodging of a complaint and registration of FIR. The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that it was the 1^st accused who had received the amounts and jewels from the de facto complainant. But however as power of attorney agent, the petitioner herein/A2 is also liable for accounts for any transaction conducted as agent of the

¶6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶7

1/4

¶8

principal.

¶9

In view of that particular fact, after hearing both the sides, a direction is given to the petitioner/A2 herein to deposit a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to the credit of Crime No.10 of 2023, pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Vannur at Villupuram District. On such deposit, the learned Judicial Magistrate may hand over the said amount to the de facto complainant. The learned counsel for the petitioner however stated that with respect to the money transactions a Civil Suit in O.S.No.17 of 2023, pending on the file of the Sub Court at Tindivanam. If any decree is passed in that particular Sub Court, either party can claim either set off or adjustment of this amount of Rs.1,50,000/-.

¶10

5.Accordingly, the petitioner/A2 is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vannur, Villupuram District, 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 the police officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

¶11

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶12

2/4

¶13

[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.

¶14

[b] the petitioner/A2 is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to the credit of Crime No.10 of 2023 , before the Judicial Magistrate, Vannur at Villupuram District. On such deposit, the learned Judicial Magistrate may handed over the said amount to the de facto complainant.

¶15

[c] the petitioner/A2 to appear before the respondent police every day at 10.30 a.m, for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

¶16

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶17

[e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶18

[f] 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 petitioners 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 5560];

¶19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶20

3/4

¶21

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

¶22

¶23

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC;

¶24

Intervening petiton stands closed.

¶25

28.11.2023

¶26

¶27

Crl.O.P.No24479 of 2023 and Crl.MP.No.17985 of 2023

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

4/4

Eagambaram v. the State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Eagambaram v. the State Rep by

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

Maya Mohan Vs State Rep by

Praveen Kumar Vs Inspector of Police

M C Kalaimamani Vs the State Rep by Its

Marimuthu Vs State Rep by Its

Mohammed Dawood Khan Vs Inspector of Police

B. Aravind Vs State Rep.by