Angamuthu v. The State Rep.By Its, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Angamuthu ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. by its, The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station (AWPS), Mangalamedu, Perambalur District.

(Crime No. 48 of 2025).

..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to order enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.48 of 2025 on the file of the 1st respondent and thus render Justice.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.M.Subash For Respondent(s):

Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for offences punishable under Sections 5(1) and 6 of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, in Crime No. 48 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that in July 2021, the petitioner, who is the uncle of the victim, entered into a relationship with her and allegedly had sexual intercourse. Subsequently, the de facto complainant and others sent the petitioner abroad for work for two years, with the understanding that he would marry the victim once she attained majority. However, the victim allegedly became involved with another person, named Amuthan (arrayed as Accused No. 1), who also had sexual intercourse with her. Following a disagreement regarding marriage plans and the subsequent complications, the present complaint was lodged.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated. He further submits that the petitioner and the victim are relatives, and the complaint is a result of a family dispute and unmet financial expectations. He would contend that the petitioner is a lawabiding citizen with no prior criminal record, the investigation is significantly progressed, and custodial interrogation is unnecessary. He further undertakes that the petitioner shall cooperate fully with the investigation.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail, reiterated the prosecution's case and on instructions, he submitted that the petitioner and the victim were in a relationship since 2021. When the family discovered this, the petitioner was sent abroad to wait for the victim to reach majority. In the interim, the victim became involved with Accused No.1. The petitioner is arrayed as Accused No. 2. He also placed the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS before this Court.

5. Considering the nature of the allegations, the fact that the petitioner has no prior criminal record, and taking note of the submission that the Section 183 BNSS statement of the victim does not specifically allege sexual assault against this petitioner, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation is not required. Consequently, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate at District Mahila Court, Perambalur, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two

sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:

(a) If the petitioner(s) fails to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen

(15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled; (b) 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 identify proofs to ensure their identity; (c) The petitioner(s) shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; (d) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (e) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner(s) in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner(s) released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(f) If the petitioner(s) thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 15-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Jeni To 1.The Judicial Magistrate at District Mahila Court, Perambalur. 2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station (AWPS), Mangalamedu, Perambalur District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

Jeni 15-04-2026