Gopal Rathinam Perumal v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.25981 of 2025 Gopal Rathinam Perumal ... Petitioner Vs.

State Rep by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

... Respondent (Cr.No.3 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police in Cr.No.3 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Parthiban For Respondent : Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 319, 336, 338, 340, 318, 3(5) of BNS Act, 2023 in Crime No. 3 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

1/6

2.The allegation against this petitioner is that the petitioner is a document writer and it is alleged by the defacto complainant that her land has been grabbed by 8 other accused persons by fabricating the power of attorney dated 13.12.2024 and based on the power of attorney, portion of the land belongs to her were sold to various persons. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that though the petitioner is one of the Director, the entire business transaction were carried out by the other accused persons. He also submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to furnish sufficient solvent sureties for his release. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case and reported that statement of witnesses reveals that this petitioner had involved in drafting of the document and that he has actively participated in forging the document. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/6

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

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submissions made by learned counsels on either side, taking into account the allegation against the petitioner that he had drafted the document, there is no material on record to show that this petitioner is benefited from the alleged transaction or that he had participated in fabrication of power of attorney and other related documents, 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 fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kancheepuram on condition that the petitioner shall execute a 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 condition that: (a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

3/6

[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] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 09.10.2025 nr 4/6

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kancheepuram

2. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

nr Crl.O.P.No.25981 of 2025 09.10.2025 6/6