Crl.O.P.No.15324 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 14.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Crl.O.P.No.15324 of 2026 U.Arunkumar ... Petitioner Vs. The State rep by its. The Inspector of Police, CBCID, Kancheepuram. Crime No.2 of 2025. ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.2 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Ms.D.Lakshmipathy For Respondent : Mr.N.Palanivel Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Ms.S.Shanmitha 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.15324 of 2026 O R D E R The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 419, 420, 408, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC in Crime No.2 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner, who is hand-in-glove with the accused persons, has impersonated as one Subbarao and cheated the defacto complainant to the tune of Rs.48,00,000/- by selling the property using forged documents and committed fraud. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and that he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor submitted that the petitioner along with other accused persons cheated the defacto complainant to the tune of Rs.48,00,000/- by using forged documents and impersonation and if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, it would be too difficult for the defacto complainant to get back the amount. 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.15324 of 2026 5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, strongly opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. The petitioner, who is hand in glove with the other accused persons, has impersonated a person who is alive and projected as if he is the owner of the property before the defacto complainant and cheated the defacto complainant to the tune of Rs.48,00,000/-. Therefore, the statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the intervenor and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police cannot be found fault with. Unless the petitioner is taken into custody, the layering of money could not be unearthed. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 14.07.2026 ssb 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.15324 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. ssb To 1.The Inspector of Police, CBCID, Kancheepuram. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Crl.O.P.No.15324 of 2026 14.07.2026 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis