M.Chinnappayan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Awps-Dindigul
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 05/02/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY M.Chinnappayan, S/o. Manickam, Bhoodhakudi, Samuthirapatti, Natham Taluk, Dindigul District..
... Petitioner/Accused Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by In, Spector of Police, AwpsDindigul District.
Crime No.63 of 2025.
... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.B. Sargunam, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS 1/7
PRAYER :- C-58B. For Bail in Crime no.63 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 28.12.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 87 of BNS, and Section 9 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, and Section 4(i), 5(j)(ii) r/w Section 6 of the Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, in Crime No.63 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner herein has sexually assaulted the victim girl, who is aged about 15 years and now she became pregnant. Hence, the compliant.
2/7
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner is no way connected with the case, a false case has been lodged as against the petitioner. He would further submit that the petitioner is in custody from 28.12.2025. Hence, he seeks bail.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner has no previous case. Hence, he objected to grant bail to the petitioner.
5. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:
3/7
6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing a separate 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 learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul, and on further conditions that :- [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police as and when required for interrogation.
[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 4/7
Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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];
[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.
(S S Y J) 05.02.2026 vsg 5/7
TO 1.The Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul.
2.The Superintendent, Dindigul Central Prison. 3.The Inspector of Police, Awps- Dindigul District.
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
S.SRIMATHY,J., vsg
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.2192 of 2026 Date : 05/02/2026 7/7