Allowed

V.Iswaryalakshmi v. the State Represented through

Madras HC29 Jan 2024CRL OP/586/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to a second accused facing charges of cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy. The court noted discrepancies in photographic evidence that prevented immediate arrest and imposed strict reporting and bonding conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail upon execution of a bond for Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, daily reporting to police, and abiding by specific conditions to prevent tampering or absconding.

V.Iswaryalakshmi Vs the State Represented through — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.586 of 2024

¶2

Crl.O.P.No.584 of 2024

¶3

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

¶4

The petitioner/second accused who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 120B, 419, 466, 467, 468, 471, 420 and 406 of IPC in Crime No.06 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶5

It is stated that the defacto complainant and the first accused are spouses. It is stated that the defacto complainant and the first accused had purchased a property and later, the defacto complainant had refused to mortgage the said property to obtain loan.

¶6

It is the allegation that the first accused had produced another lady, who impersonated as the defacto complainant and on the basis of such impersonation created a mortgage deed and obtained a loan of Rs.1 Crore and 11 lakhs. The accused Nos. 1 and 3 had been arrested.

¶7

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) stated that during the course of their enquiry, they found that the photograph of the impersonation in the mortgage deed, which was registered, diferred from the actual photograph of this petitioner/A-2 and therefore, there is a probability that the second accused had not impersonated as the defacto complainant.

¶8

¶9

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

¶10

Crl.O.P.No.586 of 2024

¶11

In view of that particular facts, since further enquiry will have to

¶12

be done, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶13

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 Judicial Magistrate Court No.III, Tiruppur, 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:

¶14

[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.

¶15

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶16

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

¶17

¶18

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

¶19

Crl.O.P.No.586 of 2024

¶20

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

¶21

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 229A IPC.

¶24

29.01.2024

¶25

vsg

¶26

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

¶27

¶28

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

¶29

Crl.O.P.No.586 of 2024

¶30

vsg

¶31

Crl.O.P.No.584 of 2024

¶32

29.01.2024

¶33

¶34

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

V.Iswaryalakshmi v. the State Represented through

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Iswaryalakshmi v. the State Represented through

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

Siddarth Vs the State Rep.by

Gowthambabhu Vs State by

Santhosh Vs Inspector of Police

Mohan Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Bhuwaneswari Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Police

Yoginathan Vs the State Rep. by