Saravanan v. Inspector Of Police

Crl.OP.No.12605 of 2023 Crl.OP.No.12605 of 2023 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471 & 420 IPC, in Crime No.6 of 2023, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.Petitioner is the third accused and is the brother of the first accused. The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the first and second accused, after being arrested, had been granted bail by the Sessions Court No.2 at Kanchipuram, in Crl.M.P.No.933 of 2023, on 18.05.2023.

3.However, in the objections filed by the respondent, it had been stated that it is the petitioner herein who had created 33 numbers of forged work orders and had distributed it to A1 and A2 and that was forwarded to the defacto complainant, who is an Engineer of Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board at Kanchipuram, seeking Government funds for execution of the work orders mentioned in the forged documents. It is the specific case of the respondent that it is the petitioner herein who had prepared the forged work orders. 1/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.OP.No.12605 of 2023 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

sli 4.Though A1 and A2 had been granted bail, it would not imply that A3 should also be granted anticipatory bail. Investigation is also to be done and it is also stated that the forged work orders should be forwarded to the forensic department for further investigation. 5.In view of that particular fact, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly this criminal original petition is dismissed.

31.10.2023 sli Crl.O.P.No.12605 of 2023 2/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis