Williams v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Illuppur

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 28.01.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY CRL OP(MD)No.22312 of 2025 Williams ... Petitioner/Accused Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, Illuppur Police Statiion, Pudukkottai District.

(Crime No.57 of 2023) ... Respondent / Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.D.Muthupandi For Respondent : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.57 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police.

1/6

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 15.11.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of the BNS, 2023, in Crime No.57 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that from 04.11.2019, the accused persons purchased property by preparing forged letters and forged stamps, purportedly issued by the Economic Offenses Wing, Trichy, and sold the same, thereby committing the offence of cheating. 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 there are no previous cases against the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 15.11.2025. Hence, he seeks bail to the petitioner.

2/6

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the property was originally attached by the Economic Offenses Wing in Crime No.1 of 2013. He further submitted that the petitioner and the other accused persons created documents, including a revocation order, representing that the property was available for sale. Consequently, the attachment made in Crime No.1 of 2023 was revoked. Thereafter, the petitioner and the other accused persons dealt with the property and sold it to one Dharmaraj. He further contended that, if the petitioner is released on bail, he is likely to abscond and evade the due process of law. He further submitted that the investigation is still in progress. Hence, he strongly opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. This Court has already granted interim bail, which was subsequently extended. Considering the fact that the property is safeguard and it cannot be further encumbered, and also considering the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, the interim bail already granted is made absolute and this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail with certain conditions.

3/6

[a] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [b] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[d] 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 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].

[e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(S S Y J) 28.01.2026 jbr 4/6

To

1. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Illuppur, Pudukkottai District.

2. The Officer-in-Charge, District Jail, Pudukkottai.

3.The Inspector of Police, Illuppur Police Statiion, Pudukkottai District.

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

5/6

S.SRIMATHY,J.

jbr

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.22312 of 2025 Date : 28.01.2026 6/6