Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
R. THARANI, J.
Umamaheswari - Appellant
Versus
Vairam @ Raja & Others - Respondent
CRL OP(MD). No. 17679 of 2021
Decided On : 19-09-2022
Anticipatory Bail - Forgery and Cheating - Crime No.166 of 2019 - 109 Cr.P.C, 406, 420, 151 Cr.P.C, 465, 468, 471, 420 IPC - The court discussed the gravity of the offence, bad antecedents of the accused, and the previous cases suppressed by the accused. The court referred to judgments canceling bail orders when earlier cases were suppressed by the accused. The court also cited a Supreme Court judgment emphasizing relevant material overlooked while granting bail and the need for cancellation of bail in such circumstances.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the accused No.1, who was involved in forgery and cheating related to property purchase. The accused and others created forged documents and cheated the public by issuing fraudulent land documents.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accused had a history of similar cases and had suppressed previous cases in the bail order. The court also considered the gravity of the offence and the money involved in the occurrence.
Issues: The issues revolved around the cancellation of anticipatory bail, suppression of previous cases, and the nature of the offence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the gravity of the offence, the accused's bad antecedents, and the suppression of previous cases in the bail order. The court also considered judgments canceling bail orders when earlier cases were suppressed by the accused.
Final Decision: The court set aside the anticipatory bail granted to the accused and directed the respondent police to take further action as per law and to secure the accused.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: To cancel the Anticipatory Bail granted to the Accused No.1 in Crl.MP.(MD).No.3120 of 2021 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Court, Theni dated .29.9.2021.)
The Court made the following order :-
This petition has been filed to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the accused No.1 in Crl.M.P.(MD)No.3120 of 2021, on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Court, Theni, dated 29.09.2021.
2. The first accused and others insisted the petitioner to purchase the property in Survey No.2319/2, Thimmarasanayakanur 2nd Bit, Andipatti Taluk, Theni District. Believing the words of the first accused, the defacto complainant agreed to purchase the land and the first accused had issued 4 pattas in the name of the defacto complainant and her family members and received a sum of Rs.3,20,000/-. Subsequently, the defacto complainant came to know that those pattas were forgedly created and the first respondent's husband received a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- in 3 instalments towards sale price of land in Survey No.2319/2, Bit I. Subsequently, the accused took the father of the defacto complainant to the Collector office, Theni and with the cooperation of one Thangapandian- Assisant, Satish, and Abdul naseer-Deputy Tahsildar produced a fake patta on 21.06.2019. The patta number was given as 5352, it was printed with the name of the petitioner. After verification, the defacto complainant came to know that the patta was in the name of “The President, Housing Board”. The accused Nos.5,6 and 7 approached the defacto complainant, on 01.07.2019 and promised to return back the amount. But, they failed to repay the amount. When the same was questioned, wife of the first respondent called the police and lodged a fake complaint, as if the defacto complainant threatened her husband. After enquiry, that complaint was closed.
3.1. Already the first respondent is having a similar case in Crime No.166 of 2019 before the same police station. The first respondent and his wife gave a statement that the first respondent will settle the amount on or before 21.09.2019, within two months in 2 instalments.
3.2. In the meanwhile, A5 to A7 approached the defacto complainant and received Rs.9,75,000/- and with the collusion of the Deputy Tahsildar - Abdul nazeer, they provided another fake patta on 16.09.2019. Again, A5 to A7 with a help of A13 promised to register the property, after obtaining NOC from the Tamilnadu Housing Board and they received a sum of Rs.2,30,000/- on 18.09.2019. Subsequently, on 20.09.2019, A5 to A7 received a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- to get NOC and they provided a fake NOC alleged to have been issued by the Slum Clearance Board, Madurai. On 20.10.2019, they have received Rs.6,00,000/-. To solve the problem with the District Registrar, they subsequently, received Rs.20,00,000/-. Later, A1, A5 to A7 and others threatened the defacto complainant and demanded Rs.40,00,000/- to sought out the entire issue. On 11.03.2020, the first accused gave an undertaking to settle Rs.20,00,000/- and on the same date one Meenakshisundaram and Sivakumar gave a statement to the complainant's mother that they received Rs.31,00,000/- and the same was given to the first respondent's husband.
3.3. Again A5 to A9 offer another patta in patta number 2389 of Veerapandi village. Already the District Backward Community Welfare officer lodged a complaint regarding 300 pattas created by the first accused. The first accused received money from 300 persons with the help of the Deputy Tahsildar-Abdul nazeer. The first accused and others cheated the defacto complainant.
3.4. The Deputy Tahsildar-Abdul nazeer filed a petition for anticipatory bail in Crl.M.P.No.2514 of 2021 and that petition was dismissed by the District Court, Theni. The first accused filed a petition for anticipatory bail in Crl.M.P.No.2982 of 2021 and the same was dismissed on 23.09.2021, within 5 days, the first accused has preferred the 3rd anticipatory bail in Cr.M.P.No.31
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of considering the gravity of the offence, the accused's antecedents, and the suppression of previous cases in bail orders.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the grant of anticipatory bail should be based on valid grounds, including the seriousness of the offence, the accused's criminal history, and....
Delay in filing a complaint and the pendency of a civil suit on the same subject matter can be factors that weigh in favor of granting anticipatory bail.
The main legal point established is the reliance on expert examination to determine forgery in land records and the grant of anticipatory bail based on the court's findings.
The nature of the alleged offences, being against a document, influenced the court's decision to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
Successive anticipatory bail applications should demonstrate substantial changes in circumstances; principle of parity does not justify granting bail if relevant roles differ and prior application wa....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
