M.Fathima v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By The Inspector Of Police, Awps-Vadamadurai

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 22/06/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

1. M.Fathima, W/o.Musthafa, 9, South Street, Vedasandur, Dindigul District..

2. Jeenath @ Sarammal, W/o.Chinrasu, 9, South Street, Vedasandur, Dindigul District..

3. Naseera Begam, W/o.Umardeen, 14/15,Deen Nagar, Velambadi, Pallapatti, Aravakurichi, Karur District..

... petitionerss/A2 to A4 Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep BY, The Inspector of Police, Vadamadurai All Women Police Station, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.07/2026).

... Respondent/Complainant 1/8

For petitioners : Mr.R.Prakash, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian, Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- C-58AB. For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.

07 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A2 to A4, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 3(a), 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and 351(2) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.7 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the victim girl and A1 loved each other. On 26.03.2026, the victim girl attended the last 2/8

exam of computer science and after completion of exam, she came out from school, at that time, A1 enticed her as he wish to introduce her to his family member and he came to his house along with the victim girl and he introduced her to their family members. Subsequently, A1 had sexually assaulted the victim girl. Hence, the complaint. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they were falsely implicated in this case. They have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and the petitioners are parents and sister of A1. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4.The learned counsel for State of TN (Crl.

Side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the investigation is still pending and the statement of the victim was recorded 3/8

under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023. He would further submit that the petitioners have no previous cases. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record, including the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023.

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of the allegations levelled as against the petitioners and considering the facts that as the FIR has been registered on 28.05.2026, by this time material part of the investigation might have been completed the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023, and the petitioners have no previous cases and hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the 4/8

petitioners, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Special Exclusive trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul, on condition that the petitioners shall 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 Judicial Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of 30 days and thereafter as and when required for 5/8

interrogation.

[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[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 6/8

absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

(P D B J) 22.06.2026 VSG TO 1.The learned Special Exclusive trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul.

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

3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

7/8

P. DHANABAL,J., vsg

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.11802 of 2026 Date : 22/06/2026 8/8