Kalaiselvi v. The State Rep. By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. Kalaiselvi

2. Manjula

3. Jayakumar ... Petitioners Vs.

The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, Sankarapuram Police Station, Kallakurichi District.

Crime No.374 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.374 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners :

Mr.S.Saravanan For Respondent :

Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/4

O R D E R

The petitioners herein apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(2), 336(3) and 336(4) of BNS, 2023 and Section 82(d) of Registration Act, 1908 in Crime No.374 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the first petitioner herein, who is the first accused had colluded with other accused and fabricated the death certificate and legal heir certificate of the real owner of the property and executed a sale deed in Doc.No.153 of 2025 and thereby they have grabbed the land of the defacto complainant. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that, in this regard, A3 has initiated suit before the Sub Court, Kallakurichi in O.S.No.422 of 2025 and it is a case of claiming share in the property. There is no fabrication of records, hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

2/4

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reported that, it is a case of fabrication of records, while the real owner is alive, petitioners created death certificate and legal heir certificate and dealt with the property and the investigation in this case is pending.

5. Considering the gravity of the offence and the manner in which the occurrence had taken place and I am of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary and if the anticipatory bail is granted, it would hamper the investigation, suit was filed only for the purpose of undermining the criminal case, hence this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. 25.10.2025 sma 3/4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

sma To 1.The Inspector of Police, Sankarapuram Police Station, Kallakurichi District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

25.10.2025 4/4