VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

Mathiyalagan v. The State of Tamilnadu Rep by the Inspector of Police, Thiruvidaimarudhur

GRANTED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
21 August 2026
Bench
K.Murali Shankarauthor
Case no.
CRL OP(MD) 18229/2026

Follow Madras High CourtFollow K.Murali Shankar

Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 21.08.2026 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice K.MURALI SHANKAR

1.Mathiyalagan

2.Mariyappan

... Petitioners/ Accused 6&5

Vs The State of Tamilnadu rep by The Inspector of Police, Station House Officer, Thiruvidaimaruthur Police Station, Thanjavur District. (Crime No.771 of 2026)

... Respondent/ Complainant For Petitioners: M/s.P.Vimala, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar, Counsel for State of TN(Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.771 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners / accused 6 and 5, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

03.08.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 120B, 420, 447, 465, 466, 468 and 471 IPC, in Crime No.771 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners along with other accused had created forged revenue records and by using the same, the first accused executed a settlement deed in favour of his son, the second accused, who in turn, executed a fraudulent deed transferring the property in favour of the fourth accused's husband. Hence, the complaint.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the above case and that they are no way connected with the alleged crime. He would further submit that the fourth accused was granted bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.17951 of 2026 on 19.08.2026 as she was neither a party nor a witness to the alleged sale deed and that the petitioners are in judicial custody from 03.08.2026.

¶4The learned Counsel for State of TN (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that the allegation levelled against the petitioners is that they encroached the disputed land and that the petitioners were neither parties nor witnesses to the alleged sale deed. He would further submit that the second petitioner is having two previous cases.

¶5Considering the above facts and circumstances and the nature of the offences alleged against the petitioners and also the facts that the petitioners were neither parties nor witnesses to the alleged sale deed and that the first petitioner is not having any previous cases and the second petitioner is not having any previous cases for similar offence, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions:

¶6Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvidaimaruthur and on further conditions that:

(i)the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate / concerned court may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity;

(ii)the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

(iii)the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness;

(iv)the petitioners shall not abscond during trial;

(v)On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate / Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners are 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];

(vi)If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS, 2023. (K M S J)

21.08.2026 CSM TO

¶1The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvidaimaruthur.

¶2The Superintendent, District Prison, Pudukkottai.

¶3The Inspector of Police, Station House Officer, Thiruvidaimaruthur Police Station, Thanjavur District.

¶4The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. K.MURALI SHANKAR,J CSM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.18229 of 2026 Date : 21.08.2026

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.