Balaji vs The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police
2026 Latest Caselaw 1687 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1687 Mad
Judgement Date : 8 April, 2026

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Balaji vs The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police on 8 April, 2026

                                                                                CRL OP No. 8827 of 2026


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                                                       DATED: 08-04-2026
                                                           CORAM
                                     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
                                                   CRL OP No. 8827 of 2026
                 Balaji S/o. Gangaram,
                 No.4/278, 2nd Cross Street,
                 Mugapair East,
                 Ambattur, Chennai 600 037
                                                                                      ..Petitioner(s)
                                                              Vs
                 The State represented by:

                 The Inspector of Police
                 Central Crime Branch,
                 Tambaram, Chennai.
                 Crime No.33/2024Chennai
                                                                                    ..Respondent(s)

                PRAYER: The Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 483 of

                B.N.S.S. praying to release the petitioner on bail pending investigation in

                Cr.No.33/2024 on the file of the respondent.

                                  For Petitioner(s):        G.Mageshkumar

                                  For Respondent(s):        Mr. S. Vinoth Kumar,
                                                            Government Advocate (Criminal side).

                                                           ORDER

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

03.03.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and

472 of IPC in Crime No.33 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks

bail.

__________ Page1 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2. The case of the prosecution is that A1 sold the property belonging to

the defacto complainant in favour of A2, by creating forged death certificate

and legal heir certificate of the defacto complainant and the petitioner has

attested the Sale Deed. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the

petitioner is an innocent and he has been under incarceration since 03.03.2026.

He would further submit that he is the only attesting witness and he has not

involved in any offence as alleged by the prosecution and hence prays for grant

of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the

respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and strongly opposed the bail

application stating that this petitioner is A3, who has attested in the forged sale

deed.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the

learned counsel on either side.

6. The only allegation against this petitioner is that he has attested in the

forged documents and this petitioner /A3, has been under judicial custody since

03.03.2026. Therefore, taking into consideration of the overt act played by this

__________ Page2 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

petitioner and considering the period of incarceration of the petitioner from

03.03.2026 this Court is of the firm view that further incarceration of the

petitioner is absolutely not required for the purpose of investigation. In such

view of the position, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail,

subject to the following stringent conditions:

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his

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 No.II, Chengalpattu 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 sign before the respondent police daily at 10.30

a.m. and 5.30 p.m. for a period of 15 days and thereafter as and when

required by the investigation officer for interrogation;

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

[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

__________ Page3 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

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.

08-04-2026 MJS

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.