Annalakshmi v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Awps Karaikudi
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 15/06/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL
1. Annalakshmi
2. Sivakumar ... Petitioners/Accused Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, AWPS Karaikudi Police Station, Sivagangai District.
Crime No.5/2026.
... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners : Mr.V. Karuna For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.5/2026 on the file of the Respondent Police.
1/7
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners / Accused, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 21.05.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 232, 351(2) of BNS and Section 17, 23(4), 5(m) r/w 6 of POCSO Act, in Crime No.5 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that upon receipt of secret information, the defacto complainant, who is a Child Welfare Officer, visited the residence of one Sriranjitha, the victim. During the enquiry it was revealed that the first accused, Karuppaiah, had repeatedly committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim. Consequently, a complaint was lodged against the said Karuppaiah (A1). After registration of the FIR, the present petitioners are alleged to have threatened the victim's parents and recorded the same on a mobile phone. Therefore, they were subsequently arrayed as Accused Nos.2 and 3 in the case.
2/7
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioners are not the named accused in the FIR. He would further submit that there is no material connecting the petitioners with the offence and they have been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 21.05.2026. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that only after registration of FIR, the petitioners were added as an accused, since they were threatened the parents of the victim and recorded the same on a mobile phone. He would further submit that since the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioners.
5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
3/7
6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and the fact that the petitioners are not the named accused in the FIR and subsequent to the registration of FIR, they were added as accused in this case as they threatened the parents of the victim child as well as the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, POCSO Court, Sivagangai, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioners shall report before the POCSO Court, Sivagangai daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [c] the petitioners shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which they are suspected;
[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during 4/7
investigation or trial;
[e] the petitioners 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 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].
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.
(P D B J) 15.06.2026 PNM 5/7
TO
1. The Sessions Judge, POCSO Court, Sivagangai
2. Do-Through The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sivagangai District.
3. The Superintendent, Women Prison, Paramakudi
4. The Superintendent, District Prison, Ramanathapuram
5. The Inspector of Police, AWPS Karaikudi Police Station, Sivagangai District.
6. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
P. DHANABAL,J PNM
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.11081 of 2026 Date : 15/06/2026 7/7