High Court · 2025

CRL OP(MD).No.12591 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 30/07/2025PRESENTTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAICRL OP(MD).No.12591 of 2025andCrl.M.P(MD)No.9998 of 2025Suresh KumarS/o.Arumugam ...Petitioner/Accused No.2 Vs.The State of Tamil Nadu rep. byThe Inspector of Police,District Crime Branch II,Pudukottai District.(Crime No.11 of 2025) ...Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.S.Mahendra Pathy Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.K.K.SamyAdvocate PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSSPRAYER:- For Bail in Crime No.11 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.ORDER : This Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused No.2, who was arrested and remanded to judicial1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.12591 of 2025custody on 10.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Section 318(2), 318(4), 336(2),336(3), 340(2) and 49 of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.11 of 2025 on the file of therespondent police, seeks bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 06.06.2025 when the defacto complainantone Ramanathan purchased and five other person purchased the property in SurveyNo.223/B2, 223/2A1, 223/3 situates at Pudukkottai from Vishvanathan as his powerof attorney for one V.Gnanasekaran in the year 2014 and they are in the peacefulpossession and enjoyment on the above said property. In the meantime, the defactocomplainant came to know that their encumbrance in the above said property, afterverification of the revenue record, Accused No.1 and the petitioner gave a releasedeed in favour of Accused No.4 and thereby cheated the defacto complainant. Hence,the case has been registered.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the defactocomplainant filed to cancel the revenue records before the Revenue DivisionalOfficer, Pudhukottai and the same was allowed. After that, Accused No.1 filed theWrit Petition before this Court in W.P(MD)No.18052 of 2025 and obtained an interimstay. Further, the defacto complainant filed a suit before the Principal District Court,Pudhukottai in O.S.No.62 of 2025 for a declaration and the same is pending. Hewould further submit that the petitioner has filed a bail application before the2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.12591 of 2025Principal District and Sessions Judge, Pudukottai in Crl.M.P.No.1979 of 2025 and thesame was dismissed on 19.07.2025. Now the patta was changed in the name of thedefacto complainant and his family members as 4255 and the petitioner is in judicialcustody for the past 51 days. Hence, he seeks bail to the petitioner.4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submits that there aretotally nine accused in this case and the petitioner is arrayed as Accused No.2. Theproperty belongs to the defacto complainant and his family members. The petitionerand other accused persons forged and fabricated the document No.1349/1974 dated09.09.1974 as if the defacto complainant, along with five members, executed the saledeed to the father of Accused Nos.1 to 4, namely Arumugam. By using the saidArumugam's death certificate and the legal certificate, the accused persons obtained aforged patta with the help of Accused No.7 (Tahsildar) and Accused No.9 (VillageAdministrative Officer). He would further submit that the other accused personshave filed anticipatory bail applications before this Court and the same have alsobeen pending. Hence, he objected to grant bail to the petitioner. 5.The learned counsel for the defacto complainant/intervenor submits that thesubject property, situated in Pudukkottai, was legally purchased by oneMr.Gnanasekaran in 1985 from Rahamadullah and others. The sale was dulyregistered as Document No.495/1985 in the Pudukkottai Sub Registrar's Office. The3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.12591 of 2025subsequent transfers of ownership, including the power deed executed in favour ofMr.Viswanathan (Document No.1070/2013), were lawfully recorded. He wouldfurther submit that the petitioner and other lawful owners acquired the propertythrough valid sale deeds, duly registered before the Joint Sub Registrar, Pudukkottai.However, the accused persons fraudulently fabricated and forged documents incollusion with Revenue Officials to unlawfully claim ownership of the property,culminating in a deceptive transaction favouring one Mr.Arumugam, who has sincepassed away. His successors, the accused herein, have further manipulated recordsand executed illegal transfer deeds, the alleged release deed, thereby continuing thefraudulent scheme. He would further submit that if the petitioner released on bail, hewould seriously hinder the investigation process and opposed to grant bail to thepetitioner.6. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and alsoconsidering the fact that the petitioner was arrested on 10.06.2025 and he is in judicialcustody for the past 51 days, by this time material part of the investigation mighthave been completed and taking into consideration of the period of incarceration, thisCourt is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: 7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing abond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.12591 of 2025sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate No.II Court,Pudukottai, and on further conditions that :-[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in thesurety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank passBook to ensure their identity.[b] The petitioner shall furnish his residential address and contact number tothe Judicial Magistrate No.II Court, Pudukottai. If the petitioner changes hisresidential address, he shall report the same to the Judicial Magistrate No.II Court,Pudukottai;[c] the petitioner shall appear and sign before the respondent police, daily twicei.e. at 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. until further orders;[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either duringinvestigation or trial;[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/TrialCourt is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance withlaw as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by thelearned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Courtin P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).No.12591 of 2025[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered underSection 269 BNS. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. sd/- 30/07/2025 / TRUE COPY / 31/07/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S. I / II / III / IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. vsdTO1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, PUDUKOTTAI.2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PUDUKOTTAI DISTRICT.3 THE SUPERINTENDENT,CENTRAL DISTRICT PRISON, PUDUKOTTAI.4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,DISTRICT CRIMBE BRANCH II, PUDUKOTTAI DISTRICT.5 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRASHIGH COURT, MADURAI. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12591 of 2025 Date :30/07/2025NBF/SAR- /31/07/2025/ 6P/6CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 6/6