Allowed

Pushparaj v. State Rep by

Madras HC1 Nov 2023CRL OP/6492/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge granted anticipatory bail to petitioners facing charges under IPC Sections 406/420. The court imposed a monetary security deposit of Rs.10 lakhs, daily reporting for three weeks, and strict non-tampering bonds. Bail is subject to these conditions and failure to appear.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with bond execution, Rs.10 lakh security deposit, and daily reporting obligations.

Pushparaj Vs State Rep by — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.6492 of 2023

¶2

Crl.O.P.No.6492 of 2023

¶3

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

¶4

The petitioners / A1 and A2 who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC in Crime No.60 of 2023, seek anticipatory bail.

¶5

2.The 1^st petitioner / 1^st accused is not only the son-in-law of the defacto complainant, but incidentally also the brother of the defacto complainant. It is stated that there was a property of the defacto complainant and it is the contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners herein, that the defacto complainant had sold the property just prior to the entire incident for a sum of Rs.40,00,000/-.

¶6

3.It is stated that subsequently, with respect to the property of the 2^nd petitioner, Power of Attorney was executed in favour of the defacto complainant. It is stated that for consideration of the Power of Attorney, the defacto complainant had transferred a sum of Rs.45,00,000/- to the account of the 1^st accused.

¶7

1/5

¶8

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

¶9

Crl.O.P.No.6492 of 2023

¶10

4.This fact is however denied and disputed by the learned Senior

¶11

Counsel on behalf of the petitioners.

¶12

5.The facts being in dispute, the Court can never adjudicate on the same and it is only for the prosecution to establish it during the course of trial. However, as a security for proper conduct of the trial and not as condition for grant anticipatory bail, but to ensure that the trial proceeds without any unnecessary delay, the petitioners herein may jointly deposit a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) to the credit of Crime No.60 of 2023 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Coimbatore. The learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Coimbatore, may deposit it in any interest earning fixed deposit and to be renewed till completion of trial and if the petitioners are acquitted, the amount together with the accrued interest may be handed back to the petitioners. If any one of the petitioners are convicted, then the amount together with the accrued interest should be handed over to the defacto complainant.

¶13

2/5

¶14

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

¶15

Crl.O.P.No.6492 of 2023

¶16

6.Taking all these factors into consideration, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners herein with certain conditions.

¶17

Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail

¶18

in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate - V, Coimbatore, on condition that each one of the petitioner shall execute a separate 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:

¶19

[a] the petitioners 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.

¶20

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three

¶21

3/5

¶22

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

¶23

Crl.O.P.No.6492 of 2023

¶24

weeks to co-operate with the investigation and thereafter

¶25

as and when required for interrogation.

¶26

[c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶27

[d] the petitioners 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 petitioners 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

¶29

Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

¶30

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

01.11.2023

smv

4/5

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

¶35

Crl.O.P.No.6492 of 2023

¶36

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J. smv

¶37

Crl.O.P.No.6492 of 2023

¶38

01.11.2023

¶39

5/5

¶40

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

Pushparaj v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pushparaj v. 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

Selvi Vs the Inspector of Police

K.Ranjith Kumar Vs the State Rep. by

Krishnammal Vs the Inspector of Police

Kamalammal Vs State Rep.by

Ganesan Vs State Rep.by

Vikram Udhayavarman Vs the Inspector of Police