Boobalan v. State Represented By Station House Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Boobalan ..Petitioner Vs State Represented by Station House Officer AWPS Kottakuppam, Villupuram District, Crime No. 25 of 2025 ..Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in SPL SC No. 317 of 2025 on the file of the Special Court for Trial of cases under POCSO Act at Villupuram in Crime No. 25 of 2025. For Petitioner:

Mr.P.Krishnakumar For Respondent:

Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar, Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.07.2025 for the alleged offences under Sections 87, 127(2), 115(2), 351(2) BNS 2023 and 5(I), 5(n) ,5(j)(ii), 6 of POCSO Act 2012 and under Section 4 of TNPHW Act in Spl.SC.No.317 of 2025 on the file of the learned Sessions

Judge, Special Court for exclusive trialof Cases under POCSO Act, Villupuram in Crime No. 25 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim girl. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was arrested on 29.07.2025. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the Petitioner.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the Respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner was arrested on 29.07.2025 and he is aged about 41 years old. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case; taking note of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side); and according to the DNA report, this petitioner's paternity is proved and hence

considering the seriousness of the allegation, this Court is of the firm view that the petitioner does not deserve the grant of bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 08-06-2026 SHL To:

1. The Station House Officer AWPS Kottakuppam, Villupuram District.

2. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras

C.KUMARAPPAN J.

SHL 08-06-2026