Anthoniraj v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 06-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Anthoniraj S/o. Savurimuthu Middle Street, Kattukoonankurichi, Virudhachalam Taluk, Cuddalore District.

..Petitioner(s) Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, Neyveli, Cuddalore District.

Crime No.3 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, to grant Bail to the petitioner by the Respondent police in the case pending investigation in Crime No.3 of 2026 dated 10-2-2026 on the file of the Respondent Police and pass any other order/orders as this court may deem fit at the circumstances of this case and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s):

X. Roy Reegan For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 11.02.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 64, 318(2) and 351(2) of BNS, 2023 r/w. Section 376, 420, 506 of IPC in Crime No.6 of 2026 on the file

of the respondent police, seek bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner committed aggravated penetrative assault on the minor victim girl and threatened her with dire consequences. Hence, the present case has been registered and the petitioner was arrested.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 11.02.2026 and is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the statement recorded from the victim girl under section 183(5) Cr.P.C., discloses serious allegations of sexual assault committed by the petitioner. Hence, he strongly opposed the grant of bail.

5. Considering the totality of the circumstances, and as rightly contended by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), this Court is of the view that if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, it would cause mental trauma to the victim and

would also prejudice the prosecution case. Therefore, this Court is of the firm view that this is not an appropriate stage to consider the bail petition. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

06-04-2026 MPA To

1. The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, Neyveli, Cuddalore District.

Crime No.3 of 2026

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

MPA 06-04-2026