A.Jayaraja v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10-06-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN A.Jayaraja ..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep by The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Tambaram, Crime No.170/2019 ..Respondent(s) Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS Act, 2023, pleased to enlarge the Petitioner on bail in the event of arrest by the Respondent in Crime No.170 of 2019 on the file of the Respondent Police, pending investigation and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s):
Mr.R.Vijayaraghaven For Respondent(s):
M/s.R.S.Indira, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
ORDER
The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 406, 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w 120 B I.P.C. in Crime No.170 of 2019 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto-complainant executed a General Power of Attorney dated 25.01.2010 in favour of Thirunavukkarasu, P.S.Rathnam and A.Gnanasekar. It is alleged that by using that power of attorney, accused persons executed the sale deeds without the knowledge of the defacto-complainant. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and he is ready to co-operate for investigation. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5.Taking into consideration that the First Information Report was registered in the year 2019 for an occurrence that took place in 2010 and that the entire issue revolves around documentary evidence, this Court is of the firm view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary at this juncture. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.
6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tambaram, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties
each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:
(a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;
(b) 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 identify proofs to ensure their identity;
(c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily Morning at 10.30 am for a period of two weeks; thereafter as and when required for interrogation; (d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];
(e) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.
10-06-2026 ep
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
EP To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tambaram.
2.The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Tambaram, 3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.
10-06-2026