Ramesh v. State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.09.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.25333 of 2025 Ramesh ... Petitioner Vs.
The State rep by The Inspector of Police, Rayakottai Police Station, Krishnagiri District.
... Respondent (Cr.No.173 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.173 of 2025 on the file of the Fast Track Mahila Court, Krishnagiri. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Deepakkumar For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
O R D E R
The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 01.08.2025 for the alleged offence under Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act and 5(1), 5(j)(ii) and 6(1) of POCSO Act, 2012 in Crime 1/5
No.173 of 2025, on the file of the Fast Track Mahila Court, Krishnagiri seeks bail.
2. The allegations against the petitioner is that a 13 years old minor girl being subjected to penetrative sexual assault and she is also got conceived due to the said act. Her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C indicates that the petitioner is the cause for pregnancy. After the matter came to light, the foetus has been aborted. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any such as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody from 01.08.2025. He is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner's earlier bail application was dismissed by this Court on 2/5
25.08.2025. Further, if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every possibility of tampering the witness. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 183 of BNS Act.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the gravity of offence committed by the petitioner and also taking note of the fact that there is no change of circumstances after the dismissal of the petitioner's earlier bail petition, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 16.09.2025 Vv To 3/5
1. The Fast Track Mahila Court, Krishnagiri.
2. The Inspector of Police, Rayakottai Police Station, Krishnagiri District.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
K.RAJASEKAR , J.
4/5
Vv Crl.O.P.No.25333 of 2025 16.09.2025 5/5