S.Ramlingesh v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 22/06/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL S.Ramlingesh ... Petitioner/Accused Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep., By the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Anna Nagar, Madurai City.

Crime No. 08/2026..

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.Satish Rajkumar.E, For Intervenor : Mr.S.Balaji for Mr. R.Shankar Ganesh For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian, Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS 1/7

PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No. 08 of 2026 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 14.05.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 8, 11(v), 12, 16, 17 of POCSO Act, 2012 and Sections 318(4), 351(2) of BNS in Crime No. 08 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the A1/petitioner and the victim, who was a minor were friends through social media and on demand of A1, the victim had sent her photograph to A1. Using the said photograph, the A1 started to blackmailing and demanding money from her and threatened her that he would spread the photograph to her mother, if she didn't comply. Out of fear, the victim gave Rs.24,000/- to the petitioner and two small gold chains. During the course of meeting, the petitioner allegedly harassed the victim sexually. Hence the case. 2/7

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 were loved each other. He would further submit that he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 14.05.2026. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the intervener would submit that the victim had sent her photograph to A1 and using the same, he started to blackmailing her that if she didn't comply, he would spread the photograph to her mother. He also demanded money from her. Out of fear, the victim gave Rs.24,000/- and two small gold chains to the petitioner. More over, the petitioner also sexually harassed the victim. The investigation is not yet completed. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. The learned Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the investigation is in nascent stage. 3/7

Considering the nature of grave offence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

7. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and considering the facts that there was a love affair between the petitioner and the victim; that the statement of victim under Section 183 of BNSS was recorded as well as 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, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and 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, Principal Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO 4/7

Act, Madurai, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police on every Saturday at 10.30a.m., for a period of eight weeks, thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; [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 him 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 5/7

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) 22.06.2026 PNM TO

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

2. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Madurai

3. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Anna Nagar, Madurai City.

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

6/7

P. DHANABAL,J PNM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.11857 of 2026 Date : 22/06/2026 7/7