Karunakaran v. State Represented By,Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP No. 35393 of 2025 Dr.D.Karunakaran S/o. Dharmalingam, C-F3, Vinod Viruksha 106, Gangaiyamman Nagar Extension, Nolambur, Mogappair, Chennai 600 037 Petitioner(s) Vs State Represented By, Inspector of Police W 8, All Women Police Station, Thirumangalam, Anna Nagar, Chennai.

(Crime No. 47 of 2025) Respondent(s) PRAYER : To enlarge the petitioner on bail pending trial in Crime No.47 of 2025, on the file of the Inspector of Police, W8, All Women Police Station, Thirumangalam, Anna Nagar, Chennai, dated 17.10.2025.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.V.Rajamohan For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl Side)

ORDER

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 18.10.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 5(l), 5(m), 5(n) r/w. 6(1) of POCSO Act and under Section 75 and 351(2) of BNS Act, in Crime No.47 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant working as an Assistant Professor in the college, in the morning time the defacto complainant usually dropped her daughter the victim child aged 4 years in her play school, and in the evening time the petitioner pickup the child from school and committed sexual assault as against the minor victim child from 02.10.2025. The victim child stated that her private part

was very painful hence the defacto complainant went to the Child Specialist and the Doctor check-up the victim child and stated that the victim child faced sexual harassment and on 16.10.2025 after the school hours the father of the defacto complainant pick up the child and went to his house and at that time the grandmother of the victim child took the minor child for bath and at that time the minor child stated that the petitioner abused in her private part. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner was arrested and he was in judicial custody from 18.10.2025. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent would submit that the investigation was completed and 164 of Cr.P.C. statement was also recorded. He would further submit that there is no previous case against the petitioner. However, the offences are grave in nature. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence and already investigation was completed and no previous cases are pending against the petitioner 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 Special Court under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act cases, Thiruvallur, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the concerned POCSO Court on all working days at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. [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, W 8, All Women Police Station, Thirumangalam, Anna Nagar, Chennai.

2. The Special Court under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act cases, Thiruvallur.

3. The Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

P.DHANABAL , J.

mtl/rna CRL OP No. 35393 of 2025 30.12.2025