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.

Crl.OP.No.22189 of 2022

Crl.OP.No.22189 of 2022

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under

Sections 420 of I.P.C r/w 120 B of I.P.C in Cr.No.424 of 2022 on the file of

the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other

accused created some fabricated documents and obtained a decree

fraudulently. Subsequently based on the strength of the Court decree the

petitioner executed the sale deed in the name of other accused persons.

Thereafter, the said property was transferred to some third party who in turn

sold the same to the defacto complainant. Hence the case.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that

a suit is pending on the file of O.S.No.390 of 2012 before the Principal

Subordinate Court. He further submits that the defacto complainant has

lodged this complaint after a lapse of more than 10 years. Hence, the

learned counsel prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

1/5

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

Crl.OP.No.22189 of 2022

4. The learned counsel for the intervenor submits that the defacto

complainant had paid the entire sale consideration and he is the bonafide

purchaser of the property. Hence he vehemently opposed for grant of

anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that the

petitioner along with other accused created some fabricated documents and

obtained a decree fraudulently and on the strength of the said decree sold the

property to the defacto complainant's vendors who in turn sold the same to

the defacto complainant. Hence, he would vehemently oppose to grant

anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and the submissions made by

both counsel and the fact that the defacto complainant has lodged the

complaint after a lapse of more than 10 years and already there is a civil suit

pending before the Court below, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory

bail to the petitioner.

2/5

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

Crl.OP.No.22189 of 2022

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed 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 – 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:

(a)the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their

photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and

the Court concerned may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or

Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b)the petitioner shall report before the respondent

police as and when required for interrogation.

(c)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or

witness either during investigation or trial;

(d)the petitioner shall not abscond either during

3/5

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

Crl.OP.No.22189 of 2022

investigation or trial;

(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]; and;

(f)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be

registered under Section 229-A IPC.

09.01.2023

smn

4/5

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

Crl.OP.No.22189 of 2022