IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 11.01.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

Crl.O.P.No.25332 of 2021

K.Gunasekaran

...Petitioner

Versus

State Represented by

Inspector of Police,

Central Crime Branch-II,

Chennai.

(Crime No.121 of 2021)

...Respondent

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the

event of his arrest in Crime No.121 of 2021 pending investigation on

the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Balasubramaniam

For Respondent : Mr.N.S.Suganthan

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the

respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 419, 465,

467, 468, 471 r/w 34 & 109 IPC in Crime No.121 of 2021, on the file

of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

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

other accused persons had impersonated the father of the defaco

complainant and executed a sale deed bearing No.11624 of 2021 dated

31.08.2021. Thereafter, the petitioner along with other accused

persons had intention to grab the property belongs to the defacto

complainant. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted

that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the

prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He

further submitted that the petitioner is an auto driver and he is the

neighbour of A1. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to

the petitioner.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the

petitioner along with other accused persons had impersonated the

father of the defaco complainant and executed a sale deed bearing

No.11624 of 2021 dated 31.08.2021. Thereafter, the petitioner along

with other accused persons had intention to grab the property belongs

to the defacto complainant. He further submitted that there is no

previous case pending against the petitioner and the investigation

is almost completed. However, he vehemently opposed for grant of

anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also

the fact that the investigation is almost completed, this Court is

inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain

conditions.

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail

in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of

fifteen (15) days after lifting of lockdown or the commencement of

the Court's normal functioning whichever is earlier, before the

learned Judicial Magistrate No.I. Poonamallee, 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 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 on

every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

(c) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness

either during investigation or trial;

(d) the petitioner shall not abscond either during 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

Magis