T.Senthilkumar v. Home, Prohibition And Excise Department

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 14-05-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL T.Senthilkumar ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep. by Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, South Police Station, Coimbatore. Cr.No.11/2026.

..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on Bail in Cr.No.11/2026.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.V.Jeyachandran For Respondent(s):

Ms.V.J.Priyadarsana,Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Order The petitioner/Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 13.03.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 27(2), 64(2) (a) (I) (ii) (iii), 62, 75, 76, 351 and 49 of BNS and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women (Amendment ) Act, 2002 in Cr. No.11 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the Havildar at IV Battalion, Kovaipudur and the petitioner is the Commandant of

the IV Battalion. On 19.12.2025, while the defacto complainant was discharging her duty, the petitioner approached her and they had a friendly relationship. On the same day, at about 10.30 p.m, A2 , who is the SI (Duty Officer) and friend of the defacto complainant, called the defacto complainant through phone and informed that the petitioner wants to talk with her and further seeks help for guard checking. Believing his words, defacto complainant came there, A2 also accompanying with them, at that time, the petitioner with the help of A2, misbehaved with the defacto complainant and when she refused and shouted, the petitioner attempted to commit rape and abused and attacked her. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is an innocent and he is nothing to do with the alleged offences. The earlier bail applications filed by the petitioner before this Court and the Trial Court were dismissed. He is in judicial custody from 13.03.2026. Two false complaints have been lodged by the subordinate officers with huge delay only to wreck vengeance. Therefore prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that the petitioner with the help of A2, misbehaved with the defacto complainant. Based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, this case was registered against the accused persons. It is further submitted that there is another case pending against the petitioner. The offences are grave in nature, the

petitioner being the superior officer misbehaved with the subordinates, thereby he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made on either side, considering the nature of offences, even as per prosecution, the alleged occurrence took place from 19.10.2025 to 26.10.2025, but the FIR has been registered only on 12.03.2026 and there is a delay in registering the FIR and already the said aspect was enquired by the GSICC and though another case is registered against the petitioner, the said case has also been filed with delay and further considering the fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 13.03.2026, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Coimbatore and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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].

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.

14-05-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order nl Note:

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To 1.The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, South Police Station, Coimbatore.

2.The Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Coimbatore 3.The Superintendent of Prisons, Central Prison, Coimbatore.

4.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

P.DHANABAL J.

nl 14-05-2026