Eeswaramurugan vs The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police
2026 Latest Caselaw 1627 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1627 Mad
Judgement Date : 7 April, 2026

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Eeswaramurugan vs The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police on 7 April, 2026

                                                                                 Crl.O.P.No.8665 of 2026


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED : 07.04.2026

                                                          CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

                                                 Crl.O.P.No.8665 of 2026

                  Eeswaramurugam                                               ... Petitioner
                                                            Vs.

                  State Rep. by its
                  The Inspector of Police,
                  CCB Police Station, Tambaram City.
                  (Cr.No.18 of 2026)                                           … Respondent

                  PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya
                  Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in
                  Cr.No.18 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

                                    For Petitioner     : Mr.G.Hariharan

                                    For Respondent      : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar,
                                                          Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

                                                          ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

05.02.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468,

471, 380 r/w 34 of IPC, in Crime No.18 of 2026 on the file of the respondent

police, seeks bail.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had created forged

documents by impersonating the de facto complainant and sold the property

to a third party in the year 2006. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner

has been falsely implicated in this case and that he has not committed any

offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner

has been in custody since 05.02.2026 and is ready to abide by any stringent

conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed to grant bail

to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the

respondent police opposed the bail application and submitted that the earlier

bail application of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court in

Crl.O.P.No.6115 of 2026 dated 10.03.2026 and further submitted that the

investigation is almost completed and the charge sheet is yet to be filed.

5. From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate

(Crl.Side), though the earlier application was dismissed on 10.03.2026 on the

ground that the investigation was at a preliminary stage, now the learned

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would fairly submit that the investigation is

almost completed and the charge sheet is yet to be filed. Hence, taking into

consideration the long incarceration of the petitioner since 05.02.2026 and the

fact that the investigation is almost completed, this Court is inclined to

enlarge the petitioner on bail, subject to certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on her

executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand

only) with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned

Judicial Magistrate-I, Kancheepuram, and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police twice a day at 10.30 am and 5.30 pm. for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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)13 SCC 283];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

07.04.2026 cda

Note:

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

To: