Antonysamy vs State Of Tamilnadu

P. Dhanabal, J

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.02.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 420 and 120B of IPC, in Crime No.5 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the disputed property is originally belong to the complainant. After purchasing of the said property, the complainant was settled at Mumbai. When the complainant tried to sell the said property, he came to know that the petitioner/A1 and A2 to A6 are said to have conspired together and registered a sale deed in favour of the petitioner by creating the forged patta and other documents. Hence, the respondent police registered a case against the accused for the aforesaid offences and arrested the petitioner. Hence, this petition.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the co-accused were released on anticipatory bail and no previous case is pending against the petitioner and he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.02.2026.

Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that it is a case of civil dispute and the petitioner along with other other accused registered a sale deed in favour of him by forging the patta and other documents and hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner. However, he fairly conceded that the except the petitioner, the other co-accused were released on anticipatory bail and no previous case is pending against the petitioner.

This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and there is a property dispute between the parties and the co-accused were released on anticipatory bail and no previous case is pending against the petitioner and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruneveli, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected;

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

[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the 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)AIR SCW 5560].

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.