S.Krishnakumar @ Krishna v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Dcb
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 18.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL S.Krishnakumar @ Krishna
...Petitioner/Accused
Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Tiruchirappalli.
(Crime No. 13 of 2025 )
...Respondent
For Petitioner : M/s.M.Niranjana Devi 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. 13 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/7
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 423, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC in Crime No. 13 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the owner of the subject land and leased out the land to one Duraisamy. In order to sell the land, when the defacto complainant verified EC, he came to know that by impersonating the vendor of his grandfather, the accused persons sold the land to the first accused and based on the same, the A1 obtained patta in his name. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit 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. Hence, he prayed to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.
2/7
4. The learned Counsel for State of TN (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, 423, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC in Crime No. 13 of 2025. He would further submit that this is the second anticipatory bail application and the first application has been dismissed by this Court on the ground that the petitioner did not comply with the conditions imposed while granting interim anticipatory bail and failed to appear before the respondent police. 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 petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the rival submissions made on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, and considering the facts that though the alleged occurrence took place in the year 2009, the FIR has been lodged in the year 2025 belatedly; however, even according to the prosecution, the offences are borne out of records and hence, there 3/7
is no scope to tamper the evidence and though this Court dismissed the earlier anticipatory bail petition on the ground that he did not comply with the condition and failed to appear before the respondent police, so far the respondent police have not taken any steps to secure the accused, 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/her appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Lalgudi, Trichy, on condition that the petitioner shall 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 concerned and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation.
4/7
[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.
(P D B J) 18.06.2026 apd 5/7
To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Lalgudi, Trichy.
2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Tiruchirappalli.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
P. DHANABAL, J apd
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 11480 of 2026 Date : 18.06.2026 7/7