CRL OP(MD). No.21836 of 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 03.03.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN CRL OP(MD)No.21836 of 2025 T.Krishnamoorthy ... Petitioner / Accused No.5 Versus The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, CCB, Madurai City. (Crime No.1 of 2025) ... Respondent / Complainant PRAYER :-Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.1 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police or on his appearance. For Petitioner : M/s.W.Pamelin, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottaichamy, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.21836 of 2025 ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police in Crime No.1 of 2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 471 and 120B of IPC, seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant was cheated by the accused persons, who are alleged to have created forged documents pertaining to his property and attempted to sell the same. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that a civil suit is pending with regard to the property in question. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that the petitioner is the main person involved in the crime and that he 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.21836 of 2025 had created forged documents and committed impersonation. Therefore, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. Hence, he strongly objected to the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5. This Court heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed on record. 6. Considering the rival submissions made on both side, there are specific allegations against the petitioner that he was involved in impersonation as well as in the forgery of documents. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 03.03.2026 pal To 1. The Inspector of Police, CCB, Madurai City. 2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.21836 of 2025 K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN ,J. pal ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.21836 of 2025 Date : 03.03.2026 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis