Jeevanantham v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20/06/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI Jeevanantham (aged 61/2025) (A2) S/o.Nalludevar ... Petitioner/Accused No.2 Vs State through the Sub Inspector of Police, Vadipatti Police Station, Madurai District.

(Crime No.357 of 2024) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ayyapparaja For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.357 of 2024 on the file of the Respondent Police. 1/4

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 11.12.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 9(k), 9(m), 9(g), 10 of POCSO Act and the punishable offence under Section 87 of BNS Act 2023, in Crime No.357 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The prosecution's case is that on 10.12.2024 at 05:30 p.m., the second daughter and son of the de facto complainant were playing on the roof of the house, and the first daughter was studying inside the house. Thereafter, the second daughter was missing in the house. Further, the defacto complainant has found that the petitioner along with A1 had kidnapped the second daughter of the defacto complainant and sexually harassed her. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is the friend of A1, he was falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions which may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court. Hence, he seeks bail to the petitioner.

2/4

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that the petitioner had misbehaved the victim girl and sexually harassed her. He further submitted that the statement under section 164 has been recorded from the mother of the victim girl. He further submitted that subsequently, the provisions of the offence have been altered as under Section 84 BNS & 9(k), 9(M), 9(g) of POCSO Act 2012 @ 84 BNS & 5(l),5(k), 5(m) 5(g) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 @ 84 BNS & 5(l) 5(k) 5 (m) 5(g) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 r/w 3(1)(w)(ii) SC/ST Act 1989. He further submitted that there is one previous case pending against the petitioner in Crime No.44 of 2021 before the Dindigul Police Station. He further submitted that the investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that nature of the offence committed by the petitioner, the victim girl is aged about 10 years and the petitioner aged about 60 years. Further, the petitioner has committed serious offence and the investigation is still pending and the custodial interrogation is necessary. Further, if the petitioner is released on bail, he may tampering the witnesses and abscond. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

3/4

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. No costs. sd/- 20/06/2025 / TRUE COPY / /07/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (CS-I/II/III/IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

MSRM TO 1.THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VADIPATTI POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT.

2.THE SUPERINTEDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, MADURAI.

3. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9974 of 2025 Date :20/06/2025 PR/10.07 .2025 4P/4C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4