K.Mani v. The State Represented By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-06-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR

1. K. Mani Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch (DCB), Coimbatore-18.

Crime No.9/2024 Respondent(s) PRAYER : This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No. 9/2024 pending Investigation on the file of Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch (DCB), Coimbatore-18.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.C.D .Johnson For Respondent(s):

Mr.R.Vinothraja Govt Advocate (crl Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section120(B), 419, 467, 468 & 471 of IPC in Crime No.9 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the first accused is the brother of the defacto complainant, owned the disputed property had executed a settlement deed in favour of the defacto complainant on 21.11.2021 and thereafter had unilaterally cancelled the said settlement deed on 07.12.2015 with the help of the third accused, who impersonated the defacto complainant and thereafter executed a sale deed in favour of third parties and thus committed the aforesaid offences. The petitioner/Documents Writer is arrayed as a fourth accused, is implicated in case arising out of the complaint filed by the defacto complainant.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and the

allegations are civil in nature, this Court has already granted bail to the first accused vide order dated 25.04.2025 in Crl.O.P.No.11928 of 2025 and in any case, custody of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation and sought of anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and confirmed the fact that the petitioner who is a Document Writer is arrayed as a fourth accused in the above said Crime Number and strongly opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing

on either sides, nature of the allegations, the co-accused was already released on bail and since, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate Sulur, Coimbatore on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on proof of payment of deposits, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] if the petitioner fails to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled;

[b] The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the Application for Suretyship [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;

[c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [d] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the defacto complainant and witnesses and shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police office as and when required; [f]the petitioner to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for Police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard; [g] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[h] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW

5560];

[i] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

10-06-2025 Jai Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

To 1.The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch (DCB), Coimbatore-18. Crime No.9/2024.

2. The Judicial Magistrate, Sulur, Coimbatore.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.

jai CRL OP No. 14210 of 10-06-2025