CRL OP(MD). No.13787 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 09/07/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No.13787 of 2026 1. Thangapandi 2. Rajesh ... Petitioners/Accused No.3 & 5 Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep By, The Inspector of Police, DCB Police Station, Madurai District (In Crime No . 09 of 2025). ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory bail in crime no 09/2026 on the file of the Respondent Police For Petitioners : Balamuruganantham R, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar, Counsel For State of TN (Crl.Side) ORDER The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.13787 of 2026 Sections 465, 468, 471, 420 and 120(b) of IPC, in Crime No.9 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail. 2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the defacto complainant, is the father of one Johnson, who was having property at Sindhupatti Village to an extent of 57 cents. After Johnson's death, the first accused claimed herself to be his wife and obtained a fabricated legal heir certificate. Using the said certificate, she allegedly sold the property to other accused persons, including the first petitioner/A3. Hence, a complaint was lodged for fabrication of documents and illegal sale of the property. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the first petitioner is only a purchaser of the property and the legal heir certificate issued by A1 is not a fabricated document. The sale deed was executed only after verification of the documents. He further submitted that the first petitioner purchased the 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.13787 of 2026 property in the year 2023, and he is not aware of any dispute between the family members of A1 and the defacto complainant. The second petitioner/A5 is only an attesting witness to the sale deed and is not involved in any fabrication. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4. The learned Counsel For State of TN (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions, submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is grave in nature and the investigation is at preliminary stage. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5. I have gone through the FIR and also the connected materials. 6.Considering the nature of allegations against the petitioners, and also considering the fact that the role attributed to the petitioners, particularly that first petitioner purchased the property from A1 and the second petitioner is only an attesting witness to the sale deed, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.13787 of 2026 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.I, Madurai, Madurai District, 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 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 three weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation. [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 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.13787 of 2026 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. 09.07.2026 dss To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai, Madurai District. 2.The Inspector of Police, DCB Police Station, Madurai District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.13787 of 2026 K. RAJASEKAR,J DSS ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.13787 of 2026 Date : 09/07/2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis