Manikandan v. The State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Manikandan, S/o.Thangaraj

2. Jayasudha, W/o. Manikandan ... Petitioners Vs.

The State rep. by Inspector of Police, Otteri Police Station, Chennai District.

(Crime No.755 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police concerned in Crime No.755 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kasirajan For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners herein apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 463, 464, 465, 468 of IPC in Crime No.755 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

1/4

2. The case of the prosecution is that the first and second petitioners/A1 and A3 are husband and wife. A2 and the de-facto complainant are sisters of A1. Originally the property belongs to the mother of the de-facto complainant and she has executed a settlement deed in favour of the de-facto complainant. It is alleged that the petitioners herein colluded with A2 and impersonated themselves as owner of the property and cancelled the settlement deed executed to the de-facto complainant and also executed forged settlement deed in favour of A3. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the petitioners are ready to co-operate with the investigation and abide by any other stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that A2 in this case, who is the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.7487 of 2026 has impersonated the de-facto complainant and executed a sale deed in favour of the 3rd accused. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 2/4

5. Upon considering the factual position, it is seen that the occurrence took place in the year 2017 and pertains to a property dispute between the siblings. Considering the nature of allegations and the period of occurrence, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on they appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the XV Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Chennai, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:

(a) If the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;

3/4

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

mp (c) The petitioners shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m. or a period of two weeks; (d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

25.03.2026 mp To 1.The XV Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Chennai. 2.The Inspector of Police, Otteri Police Station, Chennai District. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Crl.OP.No.7486 of 2026 4/4