Balaji vs CCB Tambaram — 666/2026

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 437. Disposed: Uncontested--Dismissed on 18th March 2026.

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNCG060018162026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

11-03-2026

Filing Number

1791/2026

Filing Date

12-03-2026

Registration No

666/2026

Registration Date

12-03-2026

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Chengalpet

Judge

9-Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu

Decision Date

18th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--Dismissed

FIR Details

FIR Number

33

Police Station

CCB, TAMBARAM

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 Section 437

Petitioner(s)

Balaji

Adv. R. Pattusamy

Respondent(s)

CCB Tambaram

Hearing History

Judge: 9-Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu

18-03-2026

Disposed

16-03-2026

Issue of Service

12-03-2026

Issue of Service

Final Orders / Judgements

18-03-2026
Copy of Order

Case Summary: Crl.M.P. No. 666/2026 (Balaji v. State/CCB Tambaram) The Judicial Magistrate Court II, Chengalpattu dismissed Balaji's bail application under Section 480 BNSS. Balaji was arrested for alleged offences under IPC Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 472 (cheating, forgery, and using forged documents) involving high-value property in a prime area. The court rejected his claim of mere signature involvement, finding the offence grave and sensational with investigation at preliminary stage, and concluded he posed risks of absconding, tampering evidence, and reoffending. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Crl.M.P. No. 666/2026 (Balaji v. State/CCB Tambaram) The Judicial Magistrate Court II, Chengalpattu dismissed Balaji's bail application under Section 480 BNSS. Balaji was arrested for alleged offences under IPC Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 472 (cheating, forgery, and using forged documents) involving high-value property in a prime area. The court rejected his claim of mere signature involvement, finding the offence grave and sensational with investigation at preliminary stage, and concluded he posed risks of absconding, tampering evidence, and reoffending. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Chengalpet All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case