S.Thirumalai v. The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN S.Thirumalai ..Petitioner Vs The State Rep by The Inspector of Police W-20 Women Police Station, Saidapet, Chennai-600015.

..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending investigation in AWPS Cr.No. 10 of 2026 on the file of the respondent. For Petitioner:

Mr.A.Rameshmanikandan For Respondent:

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

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 30.03.2026 for the alleged offence under Sections 5(1)(j)(ii) r/w 6 of POCSO Act in Crime No.10 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

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

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. 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 investigation is still pending and the DNA report is awaited. 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), it is seen that the petitioner is 29 years old. Considering the fact that the investigation is still pending and the DNA report is awaited and on perusal of 183 statement, there is

serious allegation against this petitioner. Hence, this Court is of the firm view, it is not appropriate to enlarge the petitioner at this stage.

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

1. The Special Court for Exclusive trial of POCSO Act Cases, Chennai.

2. The Inspector of Police W-20 Women Police Station, Saidapet, Chennai-600015.

3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras

C.KUMARAPPAN J.

SHL 08-06-2026