R.Muruganandham v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep.By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 06/01/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY R.Muruganandham ... Petitioner/Accused Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep.By, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Karur District In Cr.No.21/2025.

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.M.Vivek For Respondent : Mr.S.S.Manoj Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.21 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police. 1/5

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 02.08.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 74, 75, 85, 115, 296(b), 351(3) of BNS and 9(n)(m)(1) r/w.Section 10 of POCSO Act, in Crime No.21 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the father of the victim girl. The allegation against the petitioner is that he has committed sexual against his daughters. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 02.08.2025. Hence, he seeks bail to the petitioner.

2/5

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the offences committed by the accused are serious in nature. Therefore, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. This is the second anticipatory bail application. The petitioner is alleged to have committed the same offence against his three daughters earlier. As the matter was closely related to the family, they tried to compromise and the earlier case ended in compromise. However, when the petitioner subsequently committed the same offence again, the victims approached their paternal aunt, who refused to support the petitioner and advised the victims to take appropriate legal action. Accordingly, the victims once again lodged a complaint against the petitioner. Based on the said complaint, the petitioner was arrested. Considering the fact that this is the second anticipatory bail application and that the statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC supports the case of the prosecution, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

3/5

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. (S S Y J) 06.01.2026 jbr TO

1. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Karur District,

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

4/5

S.SRIMATHY,J jbr

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.22693 of 2025 Date : 06/01/2026 5/5