K S Udhayakumar v. State Rep By, Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26-03-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN K S Udhayakumar, S/o.Soundarrajan, 1/51 Ammani Ammal Street, Kungumapalayam, Ganapathipalayam, Tiruppur.
...Petitioner/A2
Vs State Rep by, Inspector of Police, City Crime Branch Police Station, Tiruppur City, Tiruppur District.
Crime No.6/2026.
...Respondent/
Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner and order to enlarge him on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No 6/2026 by the Respondent Police. For Petitioner:
Mr.Sudhakar Kannusamy For Respondent :
Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor :
Mr.R.Vivekananthan
ORDER
The petitioner/A2, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 61(2) and 318(4) of BNS in Crime No.6 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/A2, along with other accused, allegedly sold the property of the de-facto complainant by way of the forged documents. Hence, the case.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) as well as the learned counsel for the intervenor and perused the materials available on record. 4.The learned counsel for the petitioner/A2 would submit that the entire issue is in respect of a land dispute and that the petitioner is the genuine purchaser of the property, and even to show his bonafide, he is willing to deposit the amount and prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. However, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), for the respondent, would strongly oppose the anticipatory bail application on the
ground that originally the property belongs to Mrs.Subithra Devi and that she sold the same to Mr.Koothabiran on 06.03.2025. As a sale consideration, a sum of Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Only), by way of cheque is referred to in the Sale Deed. However, the said cheque was not at all honoured and immediately on the next day, the said Mr.Koothabiran executed a Sale Deed in favour of the first accused, who has already been remanded, and this accused, in connivance with the first accused have cheated the de-facto complainant.
6. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would further submit that the investigation is in the preliminary stage, and apart from that, taking into consideration of the nature of the allegation, this Court is of the firm view that the submissions of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner/A2 is necessary cannot be ignored. Therefore, this Court does not find any merits in the present application.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 26-03-2026 dk
To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.III, Thirupur.
2. The Inspector of Police, City Crime Branch Police Station, Tiruppur City, Tiruppur District.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
dk CRL OP No. 7700 of 2026 26-03-2026