Karif Nawas v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20.11.2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY Karif Nawas ... Petitioner/3rd Accused Vs State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by, the Inspector of Police, Melapalayam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

(Crime No.227 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.R.Mathava Selvam For Respondent : Mr.S.S.Manoj Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor/defacto complainant : Mr.R.Ponkarthikeyan PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.227 of 2025 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 police for the offences punishable under Sections 338, 339, 318, 61(2) & 351 (2) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.227 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/6

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the owner of the property in T.S.No.72, Plot No.17 situated at Kulavanigarpuram Village, Palayamkottai Taluk, Tirunelveli District, which is originally belonged to the petitioner's father one Sundarsingh executed by way of Settlement Deed vide registered as Doc.No. 4796/2025 dated 30.05.2025. When the defacto complainant submitted an online application along with related documents to change the Patta in his name for the above said property, he was shocked that the application was rejected and 1st & 2nd accused name were entered in the Online Patta. Subsequently when the defacto complainant enquired about the same, he found that 1st & 2nd accused have submitted a forged death certificate and legal heirs certificate as if the defacto complainant's father has passed away and these accused are only legal heirs of the defacto complainant's father. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner has been complying the conditions imposed in the interim anticipatory bail 2/6

regularly and the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that the investigation is yet to be completed. He further submitted that the petitioner has been complied the conditions imposed in the interim anticipatory bail regularly and cooperated for investigation. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and the petitioner has been complied the conditions imposed in the interim anticipatory bail regularly, the interim anticipatory bail already granted is made absolute and this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to certain conditions.

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand 3/6

only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Tirunelveli District, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on further conditions that:

[a]the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar 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 four weeks and thereafter as and when required; [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e]the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[f]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 4/6

petitioner is 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 of BNS.

20.11.2025 To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.V, Tirunelveli.

2.The Inspector of Police, Melapalayam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 5/6

S.SRIMATHY, J.

PJL 20.11.2025 6/6