Balamurugan v. The State Rep By Its,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP No. 35375 of 2025 Balamurugan S/o.Moorthi, 3rd Cross Street, Pulianthopu, VTC, Thondamantham, Pondicherry.

Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep by its The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Sooramangalam, Salem District.

(Crime No.45/2025 Respondent(s) PRAYER : To grant bail to the petitioner in Crime No.45/2025, on the file of respondent police.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.A.N.Rajan For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.12.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 7 r/w. 8, 9(n), r/w.10, 16 r/w.17, 11(iv) r/w.12 of POCSO Act, 2012 Section 351(2) of BNS and Section 67(B) IT Act, 2000 in Crime No.45 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was a close friend of the victim's mother. On 20.08.2025, the petitioner attended the victim's birthday and after some conversation with the victim, the petitioner committed sexual assault on the minor victim child. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that based on the false complaint lodged by the defacto complainant, the respondent police has registered a case against the petitioner. The petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. In fact,

the mother of the victim borrowed a sum of Rs.10 Lakhs from the petitioner as hand loan and there is a money dispute between the parties and he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.12.2025. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent would submit that based on the complaint lodged by the mother of the victim the case has been registered under Sections 7 r/w. 8, 9(n), r/w.10, 16 r/w.17, 11(iv) r/w.12 of POCSO Act, 2012 Section 351(2) of BNS and Section 67(B) IT Act, 2000. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the CD file.

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, it is seen that the petitioner is not named and the statement of victim girl under Section 183 of BNSS was also

recorded and no previous case is pending against the petitioner. This Court also perused CD file and most of the witnesses were examined by the investigation officer and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the POCSO Court, Salem, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police at 10.30 a.m., for a period of thirty days and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which she is suspected;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of

the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

30.12.2025 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking order mtl / rna

Note :

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To

1. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Sooramangalam, Salem District.

2. The POCSO Court, Salem.

3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Salem.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

P.DHANABAL , J.

mtl/rna CRL OP No. 35375 of 2025 30.12.2025