Manikandan v. The State Of Taminladu, Rep. By The Sub Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 06.11.2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY CRL OP(MD)No.19539 of 2025 Manikandan ... Petitioner/ Sole Accused Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Sub Inspector of Police, Kodaikanal Police Station, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.292 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners : Mr.S.Mahendra Pathy For Respondent : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.292 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/4

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 25.09.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 5(l) (j)(ii) r/w 6, 7 r/w 8 of POCSO Act, 2012, in Crime No. 292 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the victim were in love affair. It is alleged in the complaint that the victim girl went back side of their house and found missing, and thereafter, on 25.09.2025, the petitioner and the victim girl were secured at Tiruchendur Murugn Temple and produced before the trial Judge. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the victim girl were in love affair and the victim had eloped with the petitioner and he is in judicial custody from 07.10.2025. Hence, he seeks bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner has no previous cases and it is a case of love affair. However, 2/4

he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing 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 Special Judge, Special Court Exclusive Trial of Cases under the POCSO Act, 2012, Dindigul, for and on further conditions that :- [a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required;

3/4

S.SRIMATHY,J.

PJL [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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 is 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].

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

06.11.2025 PJL To

1. The Special Judge, Special Court Exclusive Trial of Cases under the POCSO Act, 2012, Dindigul.

2. The Superintendent, District Prison, Dindigul.

3. The Sub Inspector of Police, Kodaikanal Police Station, Dindigul District.

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

CRL OP(MD) No.19539 of 2025 4/4