Palanisamy v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Awps-Dindigul Rural

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 22.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 7691 of 2026 Palanisamy

...Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Dindigul Rural Dindigul District.

(Crime No.33 of 2025)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Suresh Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 33 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 10.08.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 332(b), 115(2), 351(3) of BNS and Sections 5(l), 5(n), 5(m) r/w 6 of POCSO Act, in 1/6

Crime No.33 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 09.08.2025 one Sugirtha Devi, who is working in Child Welfare Department received a Phone from Child help line and came to know that the petitioner sexually harassed the victim girls. Hence, on the basis of the complaint lodged by the defacto complainant this case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner and the victim family are relatives. Due to previous motive, the present case has been foisted against the petitioner. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. The victim girls are aged about 8 years and 5 years respectively. The accused committed aggravated sexual assault upon the victim girls. After completing the investigation charge sheet has been filed before the concerned Court and trial has been commenced in Spl.S.C.No.192 of 2025, on the file of learned Special Judge, Special Court 2/6

for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul. The mother of the victim girl was also examined and cross examined by the accused. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

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 nature of charges levelled against the petitioner, already investigation has been completed and the trial is going on, that the material part of the witnesses have been examined and accused has cross examined the witnesses, and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner from 10.08.2025, 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 learned Special Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul, and on further conditions that:

3/6

[b] the petitioner shall report before the trial Court namely Special Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul, at 10.30 a.m., on all working days, until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the 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 4/6

registered under Section 269 BNS.

(P D B J) 22.04.2026 TM To 1.The Special Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul.

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

(Crime No.33 of 2025) 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. 7691 of 2026 Date : 22.04.2026 6/6