Egambaram vs The State Represented By Inspector Of ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2547 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2547 Mad
Judgement Date : 13 May, 2026

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Egambaram vs The State Represented By Inspector Of ... on 13 May, 2026

                                                                               CRL OP No. 11986 of 2026


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                                                       DATED: 13-05-2026
                                                           CORAM
                                       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

                                                  CRL OP No. 11986 of 2026

                 Egambaram
                                                                                      ..Petitioner(s)
                                                              Vs
                 The State Represented by
                 The Inspector of Police
                 All Women Police Station,
                 Ranipet,
                 Ranipet District.
                 (Crime No. 23/2026)
                                                                                    ..Respondent(s)

                          Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the
                petitioner on bail concerned in Crime No. 23 of 2026 pending on the file of the
                respondent, on such terms and conditions.


                                  For Petitioner(s):        Mr.N.Arun Kumar

                                  For Respondent(s):        Mr.R.Vinothraja,
                                                            Government Advocate (Crl. Side)


                                                           ORDER

The petitioner/sole accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial

custody on 18.03.2026, for the offences under Sections 9(m), 9(n), 10 of

POCSO Act and Section 9 of Child Marriage Act, in Crime No.23 of 2026,

seeks bail.

__________ Page1 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner made a bad touch on

the victim girl, aged about 9 years, who is none other than her granddaughter.

Hence, the case.

3.Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the alleged

occurrence is said to have taken place on 14.03.2026, whereas, the complaint

was made on 17.03.2026. He would further submit that the petitioner has no

previous antecedents and he is innocent and undertakes to abide by any

conditions imposed by this Court. The learned counsel would further submit

that the petitioner is in incarceration for nearly two months and therefore, prays

for grant of bail.

4.Per contra, Mr.R.Vinothraja, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

appearing for the respondent Police, would submit that the petitioner has made

sexual assault on her own granddaughter and hence, considering the gravity of

the offence, he opposed for grant of bail.

5.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the entire

materials on record.

__________ Page2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

6.Considering the rival submissions and the nature of offence and also

considering the relationship between the parties and that the petitioner has no

bad antecedents and also having regard to the period of incarceration of the

petitioner for nearly two months, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner,

subject to the following conditions:

[a] the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing 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 Principal Sessions Judge,

Ranipet, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the All Women Police Station,

Ranipet, daily at 10.30 a.m. for 30 (thirty) days.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of

which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he 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

__________ Page3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

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 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 229A IPC.

13-05-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

MKN

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.

1.The Principal Sessions Judge, Ranipet.

2.The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, Ranipet, Ranipet District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

__________ Page4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

4.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Vellore.

__________ Page5 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

P.DHANABAL J.

MKN

13-05-2026

__________ Page6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis