Siva@Venkatesan v. The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 04.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Dr.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN Siva @ Venkatesan, (M/27 years) S/o Babu No.283/43, VOC Street, Periyar Nagar, Vyasarpadi, Chennai 600 039.

..Petitioner/Accused /versus/ The Inspector of Police, P-6, Kodungaiyur Police Station, Kodungaiyur, Chennai 600 118.

(Crime No.380 of 2025) ..Respondent/Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the bail to the petitioner herein in Crime No.380 of 2025 on the file of Inspector of Police, P6-Kodungaiyur Police Station at Chennai.

For Petitioner :

Mr.N.Indiran For Respondent :

Mr.S.Udaya Kumar.

Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/4

O R D E R

The petitioner, who arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.07.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 332(C), 75(2), 79, 351(3) BNS Act r/w Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment Woman Act, in Crime No.380 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner herein, who is arrayed as A2, is an associate of A1 and is alleged to have threatened the defacto complainant to extend sexual favours or else she and her husband will be put to death.

3.The First Information Report indicates that the defacto complainant had married one Muthu, after the demise of her husband Selvaraj. The accused, who were old associates of Selvaraj sought to sexually exploit the defacto complainant and had subjected her to continuous sexual harassment. The respondent police arrested the petitioner for the alleged offence. 2/4

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that the dispute regarding the custody of the children born to the first husband of the defacto complainant led to the filing of a false complaint.

5. This Court on perusing the complaint as well as records finds that it is a case of threatening a helpless lady to have sexual favours.

6. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) states that this petitioner is having 8 previous case of a serious in nature and if the petitioner is released on bail the defacto complainant's life will be in danger.

7. Considering the nature of the case and the antecedents of the petitioner, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 04.09.2025 ari To, 1.The X Metropolitan Magistrate at Egmore, Chennai. 2.The Inspector of Police, P-6, Kodungaiyur Police Staton, Kodungaiyur, Chennai 600 118.

3. The Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.

3/4

ari Crl.O.P.No.23889 of 2025 04.09.2025 4/4