M.Vinod Kumar v. The State Rep By The Assistant Commissioner Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 13-10-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. M.Vinod Kumar S/o. Mohankumar, No.19/21, Thirumangaimannan Street, Sundaram Colony, East Tambaram, Chennai-59 Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The State Rep by The Assistant Commissioner of Police Immoral Traffic Prevention Unit, Egmore, Chennai-600 008 Crime No.2 of 2025 Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.2 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police and thus render Justice.

For Petitioner(s):

S.Sairaman V.Lakshminarayanan For Respondent(s):

Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate(Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 15.01.2025 for the alleged offence under Sections 5(1), (m), (n), 6, 11(1), 12, 14(1), (2) of the Protection of Child from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and section 67(B), (b), (e) of the Information Technology (IT) Act 2000 in Crime No.2 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. This Court in Crl.O.P.No.13997/2025 by order dated 11.07.2025 dismissed the bail application filed by this petitioner on the following grounds: "5. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the materials, it is seen that the petitioner contacted A2 through A4. A4 and A2 had some relationship and they were close to each other. The petitioner purchased a smart phone, given to A2, who used the phone and took advantage of the poverty of victim Nos.1 to 3, lured them by getting dress, food and paying money. On perusal of the statement of the victims, it is confirmed that the victims are compelled and due to pitiable condition and on the request of A2, friend's mother, they involved in the pornographic act. It is seen that the obscene pictures and videos recorded by A2 forwarded to the petitioner/A3. The digital evidence connects petitioner with the other accused. It is also seen that some payments made by the petitioner through Gpay to A2 periodically. The

entire occurrence took place between October 2024 and January 2025. Now investigation completed, charge sheet filed and Pima facie materials available to proceed with the trial. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner."

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not seen any of the children involved any of the offences. He further submitted that section 6 of the POCSO Act is not applicable to the case of the petitioner herein. However, this Court on merits has considered all the submissions made by the petitioner and dismissed the petition on 11.07.2025. He further stated that there is change in circumstances since one of the co-accused was released on bail in Crl.O.P.No.11957 of 2025 dated 28.04.2025.

4. Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent.

5. I am of the view that the change in circumstances relied on the petitioner is not applicable since earlier order itself is passed on 11.07.2025 which is subsequent to the order passed in Crl.O.P.No.11957 of 2025. This

Court has also taken note of the fact that the petitioner is facing trial after filing of the final report. Hence, I am of the view that there is no change in circumstances. Hence, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 13-10-2025 (1⁄2) Mpa Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To 1.The Special Court for Exclusive Trial of POSCO Cases, Chennai. 2.The State Rep by The Assistant Commissioner of Police Immoral Traffic Prevention Unit, Egmore, Chennai-600 008 Crime No.2 of 2025 Crime No.2 of 3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

mpa CRL OP No. 25015 of 13-10-2025