R.Mohamed Thameesthin v. State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 14-05-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL.O.P.No.12827 of 2026 R.Mohamed Thameeshthin ... Petitioner vs.

State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by The Inspector of Police, Kairlabath Police Station, Ariyalur District.

(Crime No.85 of 2026) ... Respondent PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., Act to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.85 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner:

Mr.D.S.Haroon Rasheed For Respondent:

Mr.S.Balaji Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioner/ accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 11(1) (4) r/w.12 of POCSO Act and Section 67(b) of the Information Technology Act in connection with Crime No.85 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant is the mother of the victim girl. The victim girl, aged about 17 years, was allegedly contacted by the accused through social media and thereafter he developed intimacy with her. It is further alleged that the accused contacted the victim by phone, made obscene gestures and shared pornographic content with the minor girl through social media platforms. Upon verifying the victim's mobile phone, the de facto complainant lodged the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has completed 12th standard recently and that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and a false complaint has been lodged against him by the de facto complainant. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) reiterated the prosecution case and would submit that there is no previous case pending as against the petitioner. He also submitted that since the victim is a minor girl and the offences are grave in nature and the investigation is under progress, he strongly objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side, nature of offences and having regard to the fact that no previous case is pending against the petitioner and further taking into consideration the young age of the petitioner, who is aged about 19 years as well as his future prospects, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Special Court for POCSO Act Cases, Ariyalur on condition that the petitioner shall 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 respondent Police or the Police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further conditions that:

[a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

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

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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 petitioners 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].

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

14.05.2026 vji / vsn 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 official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To

1. The Special Court for POCSO Act Cases, Ariyalur.

2. The Inspector of Police, State of Tamil Nadu, Kairlabath Police Station, Ariyalur District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

P.DHANABAL, J.

vji / vsn CRL.O.P.No.12827 of 2026 14.05.2026