It is case of selling irridium –BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 16/10/2020 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP(MD). No.11383 of 2020 K.Muthu @ Muthukumar …

[10/20, 17:28] Sekarreporter 1: [10/20, 17:27] Sekarreporter 1: It is case of selling irridium
[10/20, 17:27] Sekarreporter 1: Condition imposed to deposit amount involved
[10/20, 17:27] Sekarreporter 1: r.kannan advocate appeared..
[10/20, 17:27] Sekarreporter 1: During course of arguments directed to produce irridium…subsequently deleted..
[10/20, 17:27] Sekarreporter 1: [10/20, 17:27] Sekarreporter 1: It is case of selling irridium
[10/20, 17:27] Sekarreporter 1: Condition imposed to deposit amount involved
[10/20, 17:27] Sekarreporter 1: r.kannan advocate appeared..
[10/20, 17:27] Sekarreporter 1: During course of arguments directed to produce irridium…subsequently deleted..
[10/20, 17:27] Sekarreporter 1: CRL OP(MD). No.11383 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Date : 16/10/2020
PRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
CRL OP(MD). No.11383 of 2020
K.Muthu @ Muthukumar … Petitioner/Accused No.2
Vs
State Rep.by
The Inspector of Police,
Thideer Nagar Police Station,
Madurai District.
Crime No.797 of 2020 … Respondent/Complainant
For Petitioner : M/s.R.Kannan,
Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi,
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.439 of Cr.P.C.
PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.797 of 2020 on the file of the
Respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :-
The petitioner/A2, who was arrested and remanded to judicial
custody on 18.09.2020 for the offences punishable under Sections
406, 420 of IPC on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons have
promised the defacto complainant that the Iridium is available for
sale. Believing the words of the accused persons, the defacto
complainant has paid a sum of Rs.2,58 Crores and after receipt of
the money the accused persons failed to produce the said Iridium.
Hence, the complaint.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
there are totally two accused in this case and the petitioner is
arrayed A-2. He would further submit that the first accused only
cheated the defacto complainant.
1/3
http://www.judis.nic.in
[10/20, 17:28] Sekarreporter 1: CRL OP(MD). No.11383 of 2020
4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) would submit that
there are totally two accused persons and both the accused persons
received a sum of Rs.2.58 crores from the defacto complainant for
selling Iridium and after receiving the said amount, the accused
persons cheated the defacto complainant and failed to produce the
iridium. He would further submit that on receipt of said money, both
the accused persons have purchased so many properties and the
properties are very much available in Bangalore and as well as in
Tamil nadu.
5. It is seen that there are totally two accused persons and
the petitioner is arrayed as A-2. The accused persons induced the
defacto complainant for selling iridium and received a sum of Rs.
2.58 crores and thereafter, cheated the defacto complainant.
6. Taking note of the above facts and circumstances of the case
and also taking into consideration the period of incarceration, this
Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the
following conditions:
7. The petitioner is directed to deposit the original title
deeds, not less than the value of Rs.1.50 Crores with a proper
valuation certificate from authority concerned to the credit of
Crime No.797 of 2020 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V,
Madurai, on such deposit, the petitioner is ordered to be released
on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand only) with two blood sureties each for a like sum to the
satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Madurai.
i) the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb
impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate/concerned court may
obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their
identity ;
ii) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police
daily at 10.30 a.m until further orders.
iii)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness.
iv) the petitioner shall not abscond during trial.
v) 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].
2/3
http://www.judis.nic.in

You may also like...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Call Now ButtonCALL ME
WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com