Rejina v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 24/03/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

¶1Rejina, W/o. Perumal

¶2Anitha, W/o. Seenivasan

¶3Thensatamilselvi, W/o. Muthuraj

¶4Amutha, D/o. Perumal ... Petitioners/Accused

Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Tirunelveli District.. (Crime Number 5 of 2026) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Vasantha Yugesh S., For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottai Chamy,

Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr. Sivasubramanian PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 5 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 420, 120B of IPC, in Crime No.5 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with the other accused, with the help of fabricated revenue records, obtained a patta in respect of the property in S.No. 827/2A1. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they are no way connected in the above said incident. He further submitted that no previous case is pending against the petitioners and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) fairly submits that due to a property dispute between the parties, O.S. No. 6 of 2026 is pending before the Sub-Court, Vallioor, and both parties are claiming title over the property and also submitted that no previous case is pending between the parties. However, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶5The learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that petitioner along with the other accused, with the help of fabricated revenue records, obtained a patta in respect of the property in S.No. 827/2A1 and also submitted that between the parties, O.S. No. 6 of 2026 is pending before the Sub-Court, Vallioor, and both parties are claiming title over the property. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶6Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶7Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioners and there is a property dispute among the family members in respect of the family property, and O.S. No. 6 of 2026 is pending before the Sub-Court, Vallioor and both parties are claiming title over the property and also considering the fact that no previous case is pending against the petitioners, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Tirunelveli, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. [c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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 B.N.S.

¶8The learned counsel for the petitioner requested this Court to direct the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Tirunelveli, to accept common sureties. However, it is for the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Tirunelveli, to take an appropriate decision in this regard.

(P D B J)

24.03.2026 tta TO

1.The Judicial Magistrate-I, Tirunelveli.

2.Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Tirunelveli District..

¶3The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. CRLeOP(MD).eNo.5511eofe2026 ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooP.oDHANABAL,J oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooootta oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooORDER oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooIN oooooooooooooooooooooooooCRLoOP(MD)oNo.5511oofo2026 ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooDateoo:o24/03/2026