Sirajuddin v. State By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25.11.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.32205 of 2025 Sirajuddin ... Petitioner -vsState Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Pochampalli Police Station, Krishnagiri District.

(Crime No.339 of 2025) ... Respondent Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending investigation in Crime No.339 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.P.M.Jayachandran For Respondent :

Mr.A.Gopinath, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) ********** 1/5

ORDER

The petitioner, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.11.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 75(2), 351(2) of BNS Act, Section 4 of TNPHW Act, in Crime No.339 of 2025, registered on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The allegation against this petitioner is that, this petitioner was a driver and the beauty parlor is running by the defacto complainant, the petitioner taken new photographs and by using the same the petitioner threatened victim girl. Hence she has attempted to commit suicide by consuming sleeping tablets. Hence this case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioner is in judicial custody since 05.11.2025; and that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions. He further submitted that due to the invention of the third parties the false complaint has been lodged and he was not in possession of any new photographs of the victim and he prays to grant bail to the petitioner. 2/5

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that totally 2 accused in this case, this petitioner is ranked as A1, the petitioner seized videos of the victim and investigation is also pending in this case and opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. I have also gone through the FIR and considering the submissions of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) that videos of the victim was already recorded it was captured without the knowledge of the victim, and she has also been threatened by the petitioner and other accused, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 25.11.2025 rna To 3/5

1.The Inspector of Police, Pochampalli Police Station, Krishnagiri District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

rna Crl.O.P.No.32205 of 2025 4/5

25.11.2025 5/5