[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
Praveenkumar vs State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police on 20 April, 2026
CRL OP No. 9747 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20-04-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
CRL OP No. 9747 of 2026
Praveenkumar
..Petitioner
Vs
State rep. by the Inspector of Police
All Womens Police Station,
Mannargudi, Mannargudi Taluk,
Thiruvarur District.
Crime No. 6 of 2016.
..Respondent
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Spl.S.C.No.
16 of 2026 on the file of learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court,
Thiruvarur pending trial.
For Petitioner: Mr.Swamisubramanian
For Respondent: Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar,
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on
01.03.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 7 & 8 of POCSO Act, 2012
in Crime No.6 of 2016, after investigation respondent police filed final report
for the offence under Section 9(m) r/w Section 10 of POCSO Act, 2012 on the
file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
__________
Page1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, who is the paternal
uncle of the victim, while taking the victim from Aaalakottai to Mannargudi,
allegedly made inappropriate touch on the victim and warned her not to disclose
the same. The victim later informed her grandmother and complaint was lodged.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the
allegation against the petitioner is under the POCSO Act. It is further submitted
that the petitioner is aged about 26 years and he is none other than the paternal
uncle of the victim. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner
has been in judicial custody since 01.03.2026 and the investigation has already
been completed and final report has been filed. It is also submitted that the case
is now pending before the Fast Track Mahila Court. Hence, he prayed for grant
of bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the
respondent submitted that the statement under Section 183 of BNSS has been
recorded and from the perusal of the same, there are allegations against this
petitioner. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.
5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the
learned counsel on either side.
__________
Page2 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6. Considering the submission of the learned counsel on either side, this
Court is of the view that from the perusal of the 183 statement of B.N.S.S, there
are allegations against this petitioner. However, taking into consideration the
long incarceration since 01.03.2026 and upon the fact that the investigation has
been completed and the case is taken on file as Spl.S.C.No.16 of 2026, this
Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, subject to certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his
executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand
only), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned
Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Tiruvarur, and subject to the
following conditions:
[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left
Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship
[Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of
Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy
of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;
[b] the petitioner is directed to stay at Nagapattinam
and report before the Velipalayam Police Station,
Nagapattinam daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two
weeks and thereafter as and when required for
interrogation;
[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during
investigation or trial;
__________
Page3 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or
witness either during investigation or trial;
[e] on breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the
learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate
action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the
conditions had been imposed and the petitioners released on
bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court itself, as laid down
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of
Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];
[f] if the petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be
registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
20-04-2026
NSL
Note:
1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official
Website of this Court.
2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official
Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To
be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this
Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.
To
1. The learned Sessions Judge, Fast Tract Mahila Court at Tiruvarur.
2. The District Prison, Nagapattinam.
3. The Inspector of Police, All Womens Police Station,
Mannargudi, Mannargudi Taluk, Thiruvarur District.
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
__________
Page4 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
NSL
20-04-2026
__________
Page5 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
