M. Kalavathi v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN M. Kalavathi ..Petitioner Vs State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Avadi Police Station, Avadi City Commissionerate, Crime No. 19/2026.

..Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in event of arrest in Crime No. 19/2026, on the file of respondent police.

For Petitioner:

Mr.Praveen For Respondent:

Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 419, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC in Crime No.19 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is alleged to have made forgery signature against the de facto complainant and executed a power of attorney. Hence, this case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the occurrence took place on 13.10.2025 and FIR was registered on 19.02.2026. He further submitted that the petitioner name is Kalavathi and the de facto complainant name is Vanitha Mani and the question of impersonating the de facto complainant does not arise. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) strongly opposed the bail application on the ground that the petitioner is a member of a group of land grabbers and by criminal conspiracy, they have executed a power of attorney as if the power of attorney was signed by the de facto complainant and thereby grabbed the land worth Rs.60 lakhs. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it is seen that the first accused has already been taken on custody under the Goondas Act and A3 and A4 have been arrested on 24.03.2026 and he further submitted that unless the custody of the petitioner is taken, the further involvement of all the accused and the money which they have received out of the sale proceeds cannot be identified. Such contention cannot be faulted and hence, this Court is of a firm view that it is not appropriate to consider the bail application of the petitioner at this stage. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 30-03-2026 SHL To:

1. The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Avadi Police Station, Avadi City Commissionerate

2. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras

C.KUMARAPPAN J.

SHL 30-03-2026