N. Nagarajan v. The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN N. Nagarajan ..Petitioner Vs The State represented by The Inspector of Police, CBCID, Kancheepuram North.

..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.01 of 2025 pending on the file of respondent police, CBCID, Kancheepuram North.

For Petitioner:

Mr.Naveenkumar for Mr.S.Sidhartha Vishnu For Respondent:

Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 11.03.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 465, 466, 468, 471, 120(b), 419, 420 and 109 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, in Crime No.01 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant alleged that her husband's property was fraudulently dealt with by creating fabricated documents through impersonation and false entries were made in the encumbrance certificate. It is alleged that the petitioner was involved in the said act of impersonation and execution of documents. Hence, the case was registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that there are about 38 accused in this case and this petitioner is arrayed as A10 and has been remanded to judicial custody on 11.03.2026. The learned counsel would further submit that the only overt act attributed to the petitioner is that a Power of Attorney was created in his name and subsequently cancelled. It is also submitted that there is no specific allegation in the FIR directly connecting the petitioner with the offence. The learned counsel would further submit that similarly placed co-accused have already been enlarged on bail in Crl.O.P.No.9384 of 2026 dated 16.04.2026. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The said factual position is not seriously disputed by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent.

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

6. Considering the submission of the learned counsel on either side, it is seen that the FIR is of the year 01.03.2025 and the petitioner has been in custody since 11.03.2026. Considering the limited overt act attributed to the petitioner, the fact that co-accused have already been released on bail in Crl.O.P.No.9384 of 2026 dated 16.04.2026 and that further custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required, this Court is inclined to extent parity to the petitioner and enlarge him on bail, subject to certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand only), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu and subject to the following conditions:

[a] 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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks and

thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] on breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions had been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court itself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];

[f] if the petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

17-04-2026 NSL Note:

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To

1. The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu.

2. The Sub Jail, Chengalpattu.

3. The Inspector of Police, CBCID, Kancheepuram North.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL 17-04-2026