The Madurai Bench dismissed the petitioner's third application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C., holding that there was no change in circumstances following the dismissal of an earlier application and that no cause for apprehension of arrest existed.
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.
CRL OP(MD). No.10334 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Date : 14/06/2023
PRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
CRL OP(MD). No.10334 of 2023
C.Arunkumar,
... Petitioner/Accused No.4
Vs
The State rep by
The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police Station, Thanjavur District. (Crime No.19 of 2022).
... Respondent/Complainant
For Petitioner : M/s.Sherlin Sheeba.S, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi, Additional Public Prosecutor
PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C
PRAYER :-
For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.19 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :-
The petitioner/A4, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 423, 465, 467, 468, 471, 420 r/w 120(b) of I.P.C., in Crime No.19 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that a property in S.No.50/3A situated in Neelagiri South Garden, Thanjavur District is belongs to the de-facto complainant. One portion of the above said property was sold by impersonating as if A2 is having the power deed to A6 on 28.06.2017. The petitioner was signed in the power deed. The other https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis portion of the property sold to A8. Hence, the case.
1/2
CRL OP(MD). No.10334 of 2023
3.Heard. Perused the materials available on record including the First Information Report.
4.This is the third application for anticipatory bail and the earlier application for anticipatory bail in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6451 of 2023 was dismissed by this Court on 10.04.2023 and there is no change in circumstances of the case to consider the present anticipatory bail petition even after dismissal of the petition. Hence, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5.Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.
sd/-
14/06/2023
/ TRUE COPY
/06/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
SJI
TO
+1 CC to M/s.S.SHERLIN SHEEBA, Advocate ( SR-8868[I] dated 15/06/2023 )
ORDER
IN
CRL OP(MD) No.10334 of 2023 Date :14/06/2023
DL/(27.06.2023)/ 2P/ 4C
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner given earlier dismissal and no change in circumstances.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
A.Arunkumar
The State
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
