S.Saravanan v. The Inspector of Police,

ORDER The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 447, 34 and 109 of IPC in Cr.No.181 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner herein is ranked as A4 in this case and it is alleged that A1 said to have fabricated a power of attorney in his favour and by impersonating himself as a original owner and sold the same to A3 in the year 2019, by colluding with A2. Subsequently, it was again settled in favour of A3. Thereafter, the power of attorney was executed in favour of the petitioner herein for the purpose of dealing with this property. The original owner/defacto complainant came to know about the same, immediately, he has lodged a complaint and the case has been registered. Hence, the present petition has been filed seeking anticipatory bail.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that he is only a power of attorney and as per the instructions of A3, the petitioner has come forward to act as a power of Agent. He has not involved in any of the impersonation or fabrication of records. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to cooperate for the investigation and also ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), appearing for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner herein is ranked as A1 and no one is arrested in this case and he is the power of attorney of A3, who is now having a settlement deed in his favour and the investigation in this case is pending, Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail.

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

¶6Considering the nature of allegations, the fact that the petitioner is alleged to be a power of attorney of A3 and alleged impersonation and the fabrication of records etc are alleged only against other accused and all the allegations are borne out of records, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

¶7Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy made, before the learned Special Court of CCB & CBCID Cases, Egmore, Chennai on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand

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

(a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e)If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

16.02.2026 Vv To

1.The Special Court of CCB & CBCID Cases, Egmore, Chennai

2.The Inspector of Police, Investigation Officer, CCB-II, LFIW-I, Gamma-3, Central Crime Branch, Vepery, Chennai.

3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.

K.RAJASEKAR

, J.

Vv Crl.O.P.No.3672 of 2026

16.02.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 16.02.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.3672 of 2026 S.Saravanan ... Petitioner Vs. The Inspector of Police, Investigation Officer, CCB-II, LFIW-I, Gamma-3, Central Crime Branch, Vepery, Chennai. ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police in the above CR.No.181 of 2025. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Saikumaran For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)