Allowed

M.Jagadeesan v. R.Ravikumar

Madras HC4 Jun 2024CRL OP/3799/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. to cancel bail granted to the first respondent accused of cheating. The court noted the accused obtained money via title deeds, sold the property, failed to repay, and showed conduct indicating evasion of investigation.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Original Petition was allowed; bail granted to the first respondent in Crl.MP. No. 55575 of 2023 was cancelled.

M.Jagadeesan Vs R.Ravikumar — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 04.06.2024

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.3799 of 2024

M.Jagadeesan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.R.Ravikumar 2. The State Rep by. The Sub-Inspector of Police, P-6 Kodungaiyur Police Station, Chennai. Crime No. 533 of 2024.

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C., pleased to cancel the bail granted by the learned X Metropolitan

¶12

Magistrate, Egmore in Crl.MP. No. 55575 of 2023 in crime No. 533 of

¶13

2023 to the first respondent/accused-1.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr. C.P.Sivamohan For R1 : Mr.V.R.Appaswamee For R2 : Mr.Meganathan

¶15

Page 1 of 5

¶16

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

¶17

Government Advocate (Crl. side)

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This petition has been filed to cancel the bail granted by the X Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore in Crl.MP. No. 55575 of 2023 in crime No. 533 of 2023 to the first respondent/accused-1.

¶20

Heard both sides.

¶21

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the senior

¶22

citizen who is aged about 68 years, the first respondent and other accused persons approached the petitioner and requested to lend Rs.15 lakhs for renovation of their property and also for the marriage expenses of the third accused/Latha. Thereafter, the petitioner had paid a sum of Rs.13 lakhs to the accused person in the year 2019 and as a security for due payment of said amount, the title deeds of the property standing in the

¶23

name of the first respondent were handed over to the defacto complainant. The accused persons assured that they would repay the said amount together with interest within a period of six months from January 2019 but they failed to repay the same. Subsequently, the accused requested the defacto complainant to return the documents to enable them

¶24

Page 2 of 5

¶25

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

¶26

to sell the property and accordingly the defacto complainant returned the documents/title deeds. But the accused sold the property did not return the loan amount. Thereafter, when the petitioner demanded for repayment he was abused by the accused and also cheated the petitioner. Hence, the complaint was lodged by the petitioner and the case was registered by the respondent police in crime No. 533 of 2023. Subsequently, the first respondent was remanded to judicial custody and he obtained bail in Crl.MP. No. 55575 of 2023. In the meanwhile, the first respondent filed the quash petition and obtained stay. Challenging the bail order dated 11.12.2023, the petitioner filed this petition.

¶27

On perusal of the records, it reveals that the first respondent obtained loan from the petitioner by obtaining title deeds. Thereafter, the first respondent requested the petitioner to return the title deeds. On believing the words of the first respondent the petitioner returned the title deeds but he sold the said property not returned the loan amount. While so, the first respondent claimed that he never borrowed the loan from the petitioner and also filed the petition before this Court to quash the FIR after obtaining the bail. On seeing the conduct of the first respondent, he

¶28

Page 3 of 5

¶29

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

¶30

deliberately attempted to evade the investigation which also amount to non cooperation for the investigation proceedings. Hence, this Court is inclined to cancel the bail granted to the first respondent in Crl.MP. No. 55575 of 2023. Accordingly, this petition is allowed.

¶31

04.06.2024

¶32

pbl

¶33

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

¶34

pbl

¶35

Page 4 of 5

¶36

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

¶37

Crl.O.P.No.3799 of 2024

¶38

04.06.2024

¶39

Page 5 of 5

¶40

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

M.Jagadeesan v. R.Ravikumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Jagadeesan v. R.Ravikumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P. Baby (died) 1. S. Jayaprakash Vs G. Mani

Babu Naidu Vs N. Rama Devi

R.V. Refractories and Saradha Cermics Ltd. Vs B.L. Shankar

Vignesh Vs the State Rep.by

M.Sekar Vs the State Rep. by

P. Savithiri Vs M Paulraj