Thennarasu v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Chatrapatti

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 17.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 11393 of 2026 Thennarasu

...Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Chatrapatti Police Station, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.147 of 2025)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.P.T.Ramesh Raja Advocate For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 147 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 12.12.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 351(2) of BNS and Sections 5(m) r/w. 6 and 9(m), 10 of POCSO Act, in Crime No.147 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 1/6

2. The case of the prosecution is that the father of the victim boy having prior acquittance with the accused. Utilizing the same the petitioner alleged to have taken the victim boy in a cycle for a round and the accused took the victim boy inside a house and committed penetrative sexual assault upon the victim boy, for which the present 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. Investigation in this case has been completed and charge sheet has also been filed before the trial Court. Now the case is pending trial. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. The petitioner took the victim and committed sexual assault upon him. Investigation in this case has been completed and the case is pending trial in Spl.S.C.No.16 of 2026 on the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul. The petitioner has one previous case. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

2/6

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 now the case is pending for examination of further witnesses, though the petitioner has one previous case, in that case he was already granted bail 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 learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul at 10.30 a.m., on all working days, until further 3/6

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 registered under Section 269 BNS.

(P D B J) 17.06.2026 TM 4/6

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

2.The Inspector of Police, Chatrapatti Police Station, Dindigul District. (Crime No.147 of 2025) 3.The Superintendent, District Jail, 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. 11393 of 2026 Date : 17.06.2026 6/6