Pennihin v. The State Rep By, the Inspector of Police

O R D E R The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 420 and 471 of IPC in Crime No.183 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that on 04.08.2024, one Kannammal W/o. Kuyyamaran, Jayanthi W/o. Vadivel and Selvi Benita W/o. Vadivel executed a Sale deed in favour of one Benehin W/o. Vadivel before the Sub-Registrar at Palacode and the same was presented for registration on

07.08.2024 for the properties in Survey No.68/1 located at P.Chetti Halli measuring 49 ares registered in the name of Kuyyaram S/o. Muniya Goundar, Survey No.69/2 located at P.Chetti Halli measuring 45.50 ares registered in the name of Kuyyaram S/o. Muniya Goundar, Survey No.289 located at Pelamaranahalli measuring 17.50 acres registered in the name of Marappur S/o. Muniyagoundar. However, due to discrepancies in the names across the documents as 'Kuyyamaran' on the death certificate and 'Maran' on the legal heir's certificate, the Sub-Registrar has not released the document and lodged a complaint. Hence the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶5From the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side, it is seen that the alleged occurrence is stated to have taken place on

02.10.2024 and that the allegation against the petitioner is that he, along with another person, had presented a sale deed before the Sub-Registrar Office on

07.08.2024, wherein the Sub-Registrar found the same to be fabricated and, in furtherance thereof, the present First Information Report came to be registered.

¶6At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that an earlier anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court on 04.12.2024 on the ground of pendency of investigation. He would, however, fairly submit that the investigation has now been completed and an absconding charge sheet has been filed. In such circumstances, this Court is of the firm view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence, this Court is 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 is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Palacode, Dharmapuri District 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 of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:

(a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned 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 two 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 petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

10.04.2026

kv To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Palacode, Dharmapuri District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Marandahalli Police Station, Dharmapuri District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. C.KUMARAPPAN.J. kv

10.04.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 10.04.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Pennihin ... Petitioner Vs. State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Marandahalli Police Station, Dharmapuri District, (Crime No.183 of 2024) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C r/w 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event on their arrest by the respondent Police in Crime NO.183 of 2024 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.J.Pradeep For Respondent : Mr. P. Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)