Disposed

Amirthalingam v. the State Represented by

Madras HC10 Dec 2024CRL OP/28432/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petitioner apprehending arrest for forgery offences sought anticipatory bail after cancelling a settlement deed executed on a fabricated possession certificate. The court granted bail on bond and surety conditions, including periodic reporting and non-tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with bond of Rs.15,000 and two sureties, subject to reporting, non-tampering and non-absconding conditions.

Amirthalingam Vs the State Represented by — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.28432 of 2024

¶2

Crl.O.P.No.28432 of 2024

¶3

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

¶4

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.229 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468 and Section 471 of IPC, the present petition has been filed seeking anticipatory bail.

¶5

The case of the prosecution is that, the petitioner along with other accused had created a forged documents with Government Seal and attempted to grab the property belongs to the defacto complainant. Hence the case.

¶6

Pleading innocence on the part of the petitioner, false implication in

¶7

the case, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks indulgence of this court. He would submit that, earlier this court on 26.11.2024 had granted interim protection to the petitioner, on the undertaking that he would take steps to cancel the settlement deed, which has been registered based on the possession certificate, which is stated to be a fabricated one. He would submit that pursuant to the undertaking, the petitioner has cancelled the settlement deed on 04.12.2024 and which has been registered in Document.No.5291 of 2024 at the office of SRO, Pethanaickenpalayam, Attur, Salem District. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may

¶8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 1 of 4

¶9

Crl.O.P.No.28432 of 2024

¶10

be imposed by this Court.

¶11

The case of the prosecution as putforth by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, would submit that, the settlement deed has been cancelled by the petitioner.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing for the intervenor submitted that the settlement deed has been cancelled.

¶13

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent Police, the learned counsel for the intervenor and perused the materials available on record, this court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶14

Accordingly, the petitioner 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 I, Attur, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with two sureties, each

¶15

for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 2 of 4

¶16

Crl.O.P.No.28432 of 2024

¶17

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:

¶18

[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 his Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

¶19

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation;

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

[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 5560];

¶23

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

10.12.2024

(1/2)

dsn

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

¶28

Page 3 of 4

¶29

Crl.O.P.No.28432 of 2024

¶30

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

¶31

dsn

¶32

Crl.O.P.No.28432 of 2024

¶33

10.12.2024

¶34

(½)

¶35

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

¶36

Page 4 of 4

Amirthalingam v. the State Represented by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amirthalingam v. the State Represented 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

Brammamoorthy @ Moorthy Vs the State Rep by

R. Janakiraman Vs State Rep.by

Pappa Vs The State Rep by

Nagammal Vs Amirthalingam

Dhinesh (A6) Vs the State Represented by Its

Mohan Vs State Rep. by