Kannikumar v. State By Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Kannikumar ..Petitioner Vs State by Inspector of Police Central Crime Branch Police Station, Tambaram City.

Crime No.24/2026 ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.24 of 2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch Police Station, Tambaram City.

For Petitioner:

Mr.E.C.Murali For Respondent:

Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar Counsel for Government of Tamilnadu (Criminal Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.06.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 for which corresponding BNS Sections are 318(4), 336(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No.24 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had connived with the other accused and created false and fabricated documents so as to mischievously grab the lands that was in possession of the defacto Complainant and hence the case

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that A1 alone impersonated the defacto complainant and fabricated the legal heir certificate and other documents. The petitioner is not related to A1 in any manner. It is further submitted that only after A2 to A7 obtained title under the settlement deed, they executed the Power of Attorney in favour of the petitioner. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner has been in incarceration since 09.06.2026. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) strongly opposed the bail application by submitting that the Power of Attorney stood in the name of the petitioner and unless the settlement deed executed in favour of A2 to A7 is cancelled, enlarging the petitioner on bail would jeopardize the prosecution case. It is further submitted that A2 to A7 are still absconding.

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

6. Though the objection raised by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appears to be attractive, the overt act attributed to the petitioner is only that he obtained the Power of Attorney from A2 to A7. It is also admitted that the said Power of Attorney has already been cancelled. In view of the above position and taking into consideration the limited overt act attributed to the petitioner, his incarceration since 09.06.2026, and the fact that no further custodial interrogation is required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner 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 Judicial Magistrate No.1, Kancheepuram, 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 twice a day at 10.30 a.m. and 05.30 p.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.

29-06-2026 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 learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Kancheepuram.

2. The Sub Prison, Kancheepuram.

3. The Inspector of Police Central Crime Branch Police Station, Tambaram City.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL 29-06-2026