Balaji vs CCB Tambaram — 666/2026

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

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNCG060018162026

e-Filing Number

11-03-2026

Filing Number

1791/2026

Filing Date

12-Mar-2026

Registration No

666/2026

Registration Date

12-Mar-2026

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Chengalpet

Judge

9-Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu

Decision Date

18-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--Dismissed

Last updated 14-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

33

Police Station

CCB, TAMBARAM

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure Section 437

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Balaji

    Adv. R. Pattusamy

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.CCB Tambaram

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    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.

  3. 18-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Issue of Service

    Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpattu

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 12-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 666/2026

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.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case