Sukumar v. State Rep.By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 12.06.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Sukumar ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Villupuram Town Police Station, Villupuram District.

(Crime No.151 of 2026) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.151 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.W.Camyles Gandhi For Respondent : Mr.N.Palanivel Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Section 318(4) of BNS in Crime No.151 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

1/6

2. The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant and his son are in possession and enjoyment of a vacant plot measuring 8,305 sq.ft. situated at Nadutheru, Santhana Gopalapuram, Villupuram District. The petitioner, along with a land broker, approached them for purchase of the property and entered into a sale agreement dated 03.01.2026 for a total sale consideration of Rs.3,15,59,000/-, after paying an advance of Rs.60,00,000/-. It is alleged that, without paying the balance sale consideration, the petitioner issued a legal notice and created disputes with the de facto complainant. It is further alleged that the petitioner fraudulently obtained the signature of the de facto complainant, transferred the electricity service connection in his name and also applied for DTCP approval. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

2/6

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions.

6. From the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side and the materials available on record, it is seen that the entire dispute arises out of a sale agreement entered into between the parties. Though the allegations levelled against the petitioner pertain to fabrication and forgery, considering the totality of the circumstances, particularly the fact that the sale agreement was entered into on 03.01.2026 and the First Information Report came to be registered only on 23.05.2026, this Court is of the considered view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required at this length of time. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to 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 (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Villupuram on condition that the petitioner shall execute a 3/6

bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty 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 learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Villupuram daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

(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.

12.06.2026 kv 4/6

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-I, Villupuram.

2.The Inspector of Police, Villupuram Town Police Station, Villupuram District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 5/6

C.KUMARAPPAN.J.

kv 12.06.2026 6/6