N. Kalyani @ Kalyanasundaram, v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Dcb Tirunelveli

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 04.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 10098 of 2026 N.Kalyani @ Kalyanasundaram ... Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Tirunelveli District.

(Crime No.10 of 2026)

...Respondents/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Mohandas Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl. side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 10 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 420and 120B of IPC, in Crime No.10 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory 1/6

bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant purchased the property from the petitioner herein. Thereafter, when she see the Encumbrance Certificate, it was found that the name of the second accused was there. A fraudulent sale was done through the third accused under the guise of power agent to the first accused. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submitted that without his knowledge the third accused, who is the power agent, fraudulently registered the sale deed. There is a civil suit is also pending in this regard. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that the offences are grave in nature. The accused persons suppressing the earlier sale deed executed a new sale deed in favour of the first accused. The petitioner has no previous case. Investigation is still pending. He vehemently opposed the 2/6

grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6.

Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, the alleged occurrence took place in the year 2007 the FIR has been registered in the year 2026, even according to the prosecution, the petitioner has not directly executed any document in favour of A2, already the petitioner being the principal executed a power deed in favour of A3 and thereafter the A3 sold the property to A2, prior to that in the year 2003 itself the property was sold to the defacto complainant by the petitioner, t thereafter, the petitioner has not executed any document and also the petitioner has filed a civil suit in respect of the same property and considering all other facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] 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, Tirunelveli, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.

Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police at 10.30 a.m., on every Saturday for a period of eight weeks, thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioner 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 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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

4/6

(P D B J) 04.06.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tirunelveli.

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

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 10098 of 2026 Date : 04.06.2026 6/6