Rajendhiran v. The State Rep. By The Sub-Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Rajendhiran ... Petitioner Vs.

State by Sub-Inspector of Police, AWPS Cheyyar, Thiruvannamalai District.

Crime No. 26 of 2025.

... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the event of the arrest of petitioner by police for the reasons stated in the petition, in connection with the case in Crime No.26 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.A.Anbharasu For Respondent :

Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 332(1), 64(2)(m), 351(3) of Bhrathiya Naya Sanitha 2023 (BNS) (can be compared to sections 449, 376 and 503 of IPC 1860) and Section 5(1), 5(j)(ii) and 6(1) of Protection of child from 1/6

Sexual Offences Act 2012 in Crime No.26 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim, due to which she got pregnant, who is aged about 17 years. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is not deny the existence of a love affair. He further submitted that the petitioner filed an affidavit before this Court, undertaking to marry the vicitm once both attain the age of majority and that the families of both the petitioner and the victim have also consented to the proposed marriage. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner had committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim aged about 17 years, due to which the victim got pregnant and delivered a baby. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/6

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

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either sides and taking note of the nature of the allegations and since, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required and also in view of the affidavit of undertaking filed by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with 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 on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar 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 condition that: [a] if the petitioner fails to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled;

3/6

[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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police everyday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial and he shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required; [e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses and shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;;

[f] the petitioner to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard;

[g] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been 4/6

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)13 SCC 283];

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

21.07.2025 rap To

1. Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar

2. The Sub-Inspector of Police, AWPS Cheyyar, Thiruvannamalai District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

rap 21.07.2025 6/6