The nature of the alleged offences, being against a document, influenced the court's decision to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: C-24AB.For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.17 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent Police.)

1. The Court made the following order:-

The petitioners, who are arrayed as A1, A2, A6, A7 and A8 apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 420, 417, 120(B) and 506(i) IPC, in Crime No.17 of 2022, seeking anticipatory bail

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant lodged a complaint stating that her husband Prabhakar is in abroad. The properties, which belongs to Musician Illayaraja were available for sale measuring to an extent of 275.4 cents. It was informed to her by his Manager namely A7. The land brokers Rajangam and Ravichandran @ Ravi have also informed the same to her husband. After visiting the property, they intended to purchase 60 cents. So, they approached A1 and his wife. They told them that formalities of sale can be completed, after getting permission from the owner. It was agreed that Rs.73,000/- is to be paid per cent. On 30/06/2019, they demanded that Rs.1,00,000/- must be paid towards advance. It was also paid. They also demanded Rs. 4,00,000/- as further advance and also told that then only the power of attorney can be executed in favour of A1. That was also transferred, on 02/09/2019. Again on 17/09/2019, Rs.10,00,000/- was paid. After registration of the power of attorney, they told that another property was available for sale and it can be sold for Rs.55,000/- per cent. They also promised to execute the sale deed. Totally Rs.1.60 crores was paid. A attempt was made by the de-facto complainant to get the sale deed after payment of the balance consideration of Rs.2,00,000/-. But later, A1 executed a sale deed in favour of A2, who is the wife. When that was enquired, they gave some unbelievable reasons. On 25/08/2021, they demanded balance amount of Rs.2,00,000/- and asked to come to the Devakottai Sub Registrar office. There A1 and the Land Brokers Rajangam and Ravichandran @ Ravi were available. At that time, A1 demanded the original sale agreement for preparing the sale deed.

3. Believing the words, she handed over the same. But later, she was informed that A1 fell down and so the sale can be executed to some other day. But in spite of the repeated demands, there was no proper response. Later she came to know that she was cheated. When that was enquired she was also criminally intimidated. On the basis of the complaint, the case was registered.

4. Seeking anticipatory bail, A1, A2, A6, A7 and A8 have filed these petitions.

5. Heard both sides.

6. Even at the out set, the learned counsel appearing for the first accused would submit that he is ready to execute the sale deed in favour of the de-facto complainant, if the de-facto complainant is ready to pay the balance amount. But on further enquiry, it is revealed that another agreement also existed between the parties, wherein the total sale consideration mentioned as Rs.3,44,40,000/-. According the learned counsel appearing for the first accused, that agreement is the original agreement and the present agreement concerning the present complaint is absolutely a forged document.

7. The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor/de-facto complainant would submit that on the particular date, two agreements have been entered between the parties. One for the purpose of obtaining bank loan and another for the purpose of selling the property. According to him, the agreement under this complaint is the real one and not the agreement entered between the parties with regard to the getting of Bank loan.

8. When serious allegation of forgery has been made by A1, with regard to the present subject complaint, the Investigating Officer was directed to be present before this court and he has submitted that in respect of the present complaint agreement, he enquired the parties and the document writer. He has stated that he has prepared the document and in that document only the defacto compl