Arunkumar v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Awps-Vadamadurai

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 01.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 6342 of 2026 Arunkumar ... Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Vadamadurai, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.1 of 2026)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Karuppasamypandiyan Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 1 of 2026 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 10.02.2026 for the offences punishable under Section 9 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2012 and Sections 5(I), 5(j)(ii), 6, 17 of Protection of Children 1/6

from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, in Crime No.1 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was in a romantic relationship with the victim, which led them to elope and live as husband and wife. Due to which, the victim became pregnant, but the same was miscarriage. While receiving medical treatment for the same, the mother of the victim give the complaint. On the basis of the complaint, the present case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he has not involved in any offence as alleged in the FIR. It is a consensual relationship between the petitioner and the victim. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner has no previous case. He would further submitted that the investigation has been completed and the charge sheet yet to be filed. There was love affair between the petitioner and the victim. Though it is a consensual relationship, the victim is a minor girl. Hence, he 2/6

opposed the grant of bail.

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

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, considering the fact that the petitioner has no previous case, the relationship between the parties, the investigation has been completed and also considering the period of incarceration, 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 Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul District, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul District on all working days at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the 3/6

offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/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 269 BNS.

(P D B J) 01.04.2026 TM 4/6

To 1.The Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul District.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Vadamadurai, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.1 of 2026) 3.The Superintendent, District Prison, Dindigul. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6342 of 2026 Date : 01.04.2026 6/6