Raman Nadanasababathi v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 21.05.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR 1.Raman Nadanasababathi 2.Rajagopal Periyannan
...Petitioners/Accused -1 &2
Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Trichy.
(Crime No. 70 of 2024 )
...Respondent/Complainant
For Petitioners : Mr.B.Periyannan Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.S.S.Manoj Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- 1/7
For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 70 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 120B of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 70 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the other accused created forged documents intended to be registered before the de-facto complainant. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they are no way connected in the above said incident. They have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that already a suit was 2/7
pending between the parties and the same was ended in favour of A2. He would further submit that already co-accused was granted anticipatory bail. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, a case has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 120B of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 70 of 2024. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the rival submissions made on either side and 3/7
the nature of offences charged against the petitioners, and considering the facts that there is a property dispute between the parties and co-accused was already granted anticipatory bail, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:
[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate-VI, Trichy, and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police, on the first day of every month at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;
[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature.
4/7
[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[e] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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].
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
(R V J) 21.05.2026 apd 5/7
To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-VI, Trichy.
2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Trichy.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J apd
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 9712 of 2026 Date : 21.05.2026 7/7