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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 06.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL.O.P.No.20 of 2026 Ambika ... Petitioner

Versus

The State rep by its, The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Ariyalur District.

(Crime No.03 of 2025) .. Respondent Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.03 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner :

M/s.Athiniveda For Respondent :

Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 474 of IPC, in Crime No.03 of 2025 registered on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

1/6

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that, the defacto complainant is having a land in Survey No.360/4 of the Silambur Village. A6 namely Rayar by obtaining bogus patta and executed a sale deed in favour of A11 namely Kokila. Similarly A1, the petitioner herein joining hands with other accused, A2 Village Administrative Officer and other officers created bogus patta for a land in Survey No.360/3A, the petitioner herein assisted the other accused to execute the sale deed in favour of A11/Kokila. Hence the complaint has been lodged.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution, and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the coaccused was released on bail by this Court in Crl.OP.No.21340 of 2025 dated 18.11.2025. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner is ranked as A4 in this case and that he along with other accused assisted the main accused to execute the sale deed in favour of A11. He further submitted that the investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/6

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) and perused the materials available on record.

6. I have also gone through the orders passed by this Court in Crl.OP.No.21340 of 2025 dated 18.11.2025 and FIR, it was revealed that the petitioner involved in fabrication of records and based on the same, patta is also obtained without the knowledge of the defacto complainant. Since all the allegations are borne out of the records, the custodial interrogation is not necessary therefore this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance, within a period of fifteen

(15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Jayankondam, 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

3/6

(a) the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b) 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;

(c) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (d) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(e) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the 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) AIR SCW 5560]; and;

(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

06.01.2026 drl 4/6

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Jayankondam.

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

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

5/6

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

drl CRL.O.P.No.20 of 2026 06.01.2026 6/6