Vijayarangan v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13-10-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP NO.27781 of 2025 Vijayarangan ... Petitioner/ Accused Vs The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, Tiruvannamalai East Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.
(Crime No.302 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest by the respondent in Crime No.302 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr. E. Kannadasan For Respondent : Mr. S. Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ****** 1/4
O R D E R
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 466, 468 and 474 of IPC in Crime No.302 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, who worked as Senior Bailiff at District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Kilpennathur, Tiruvannamalai District was involved in fabrication of raising of attachment order in E.P.Nos.147 of 2001 in O.S.No.132 of 2000 and E.P.No.25 of 2002 in O.S.No.187 of 2001; that based upon the fabricated order, the Sub Registrar, Tiruvannamalai removed the attachment order from the Registry. Hence, this case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was falsely implicated in this case and he was not involved in the above said offence. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, hence sought 2/4
for anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police while opposing the anticipatory bail to the petitioner reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner was involved in fabrication of Court order by raising the order of attachment by mis-using his official position as Senior Bailiff; that the photograph proof is also there to substantiate the active participation of this petitioner in the said offence; and that the investigation of this case is pending.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and taking note of the nature of allegation and its a case of fabrication of Court Order, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much necessary for the purpose of investigation, thereby this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 13.10.2025 stn 3/4
K. RAJASEKAR, J.
stn To
1. The Inspector of Police, Tiruvannamalai East Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.
(Crime No.302 of 2025)
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
Crl.O.P. No.27781 of 2025 13.10.2025 4/4