CRL OP(MD). No.13188 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 03/07/2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD)No.13188 of 2026 1. Marimuthu 2.Valliammal 3.Nandhini ... Petitioners/Accused Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its, The Inspector of Police, DCB Police Station, Thoothukudi. (Crime No.02 of 2026) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : S.Muthu Kumar Raja, For Respondent : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar, Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.13188 of 2026 PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.2/2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/accused, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Section 120B, 465, 468, 471 and 420 of IPC, 1860, in Crime No.2 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that accused approached the defacto complainant for developing her property into residential plots and sell the same for profit. For the said purpose, the defacto complainant entrusted the original title deeds with the accused. She also executed a settlement deed in favour of the first accused for two plots. However, the accused forged the said document by adding several plots and misappropriated the sale proceeds. Further, when the defacto complainant attempted to file an objection petition for preventing further registration based on the forged document, the accused abused the 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.13188 of 2026 defacto complainant in filthy language and criminally intimidated her with dire consequences. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case. They have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioners herein are the attestors of the document, which was alleged to have been forged to the extent that some plot numbers have been added in the original settlement deed executed by the defacto complainant. He would further submit that the co-accused have also been granted anticipatory bail and that the petitioners are ready to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4. The learned counsel for State (Crl. Side) would submit that the defacto complainant executed a settlement deed in favour of the first accused and by forging the said settlement deed, he added some plot numbers and sold the property to third parties, in which, the petitioners herein acted as attestors to the document. He further submitted that the 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.13188 of 2026 investigation is pending and opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the fact that the petitioners are only attestors to the document and that the co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail, I am of the view that custodial interrogation is not necessary in this case and hence, 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 bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.4, Thoothukudi, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.13188 of 2026 Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioners 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 the interrogation. [c] the petitioners shall cooperate with the investigation. [d] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [e] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [f] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [g] 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]. 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.13188 of 2026 [h] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S. 03.07.2026 Lm TO 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.4, Thoothukudi. 2.The Inspector of Police, DCB Police Station, Thoothukudi. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.13188 of 2026 K.RAJASEKAR,J. Lm ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.13188 of 2026 Date : 03/07/2026 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis