S.Jaganath @ Jaganathan v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 16.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR S.Jaganath @ Jaganathan ... Petitioner Vs.

The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Tiruvallur District.

Crime No.4 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.4 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.A.Logesh For Respondent :

Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

O R D E R

1/6

The petitioner herein apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 of IPC in Crime No.4 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the land in S.No.417/5, measuring about 0.20 cents at Vasinampattu Village, is the ancestral property of the de facto complainant's father, Chokkalingam, under Patta No.500. It is alleged that in 2008 one Vijaykumar created a forged document vide Doc.No.313/2008 and executed a general Power of Attorney in favour of Vasudevan, who in turn sold the property to the petitioner by Doc.No.156/2018 dated 08.01.2018. Thus, the petitioner along with others is alleged to have committed forgery to deprive the de facto complainant's father of his ancestral property. Hence, the present complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the 2/6

petitioner.

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

5. Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the nature of the allegations and the transaction was taken place in the year 2008 and 2018, and occurrence is relating to execution of documents, as custodial interrogation 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 ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Tiruvallur, 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 3/6

sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition that:

[a] if the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of ten 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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks, and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[d] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

[e] the petitioner shall cooperate with the 4/6

investigation and shall come forward to submit sample signatures if any required for the purpose of investigation; [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 16.09.2025 cda To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-I, Tiruvallur.

2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Tiruvallur District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

cda 5/6

16.09.2025 6/6