Gnanaselvam vs State

C.Kumarappan, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 08.04.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 467, 471 of IPC read with 120(B) of IPC in Crime No.58 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the subject property originally belonged to the defacto complainant's aunt and uncle, who were residing in the United States of America. The defacto complainant was duly authorized through a power of attorney to manage the said property. While so, it is alleged that the petitioner, along with other accused persons, impersonated the original owner and created forged and fabricated documents, and thereafter registered a Will in favour of one Raja. Hence, the case.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 08.04.2026 and is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the case of the prosecution and submitted that there are about seven accused involved in the case, and that the petitioner impersonated the original owner. It is further submitted that A7, who is stated to be the mastermind of the alleged offence, is still absconding. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, the age of the petitioner and the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner since 08.04.2026, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, subject to certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on 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 Metropolitan Magistrate-XVI, George Town, and subject to the following conditions:

[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 a.m. and 05.30 p.m. until further orders;

[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 Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions had been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court itself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];

[f] if the petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.