[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
Rajesh vs The State Rep. By Inspector Of Police on 22 May, 2026
C.R.L. O.P. Nos.11588, 12481, 12155 & 11573 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.05. 2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL
CRL OP NOS.11588, 12481, 12155 AND 11573 OF 2026
AND
CRL.MP.NOS.8613, 8866, 8867 AND 8618 OF 2026
CRL.O.P.NO.11588 OF 2026
Rajesh ... Petitioner / A8
Vs.
The State Rep. by
Inspector of Police
CCD-I, CCW-SCCIC,
Chennai.
(Crime No.47 of 2026) ... Respondent / Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 praying to grant bail to
the petitioner pending investigation in Crime No.47 of 2026 on the file of
the respondent police.
For Petitioner : Ms.J.Kamalini
For Respondent : Mr.C.R.Malarvannan,
Government Advocate (Criminal side)
For Intervenor : Mr.Vijayan Subramanian
Page No.1 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.L. O.P. Nos.11588, 12481, 12155 & 11573 of 2026
CRL.O.P.NO.12481 OF 2026
1.S.Selvam
2.S.Prashanth
3.S.Rajini ... Petitioners / A1, 2 & 4
Vs.
The State Rep. by
Inspector of Police
CCD-I, CCW-SCCIC,
Chennai.
(Crime No.47 of 2026) ... Respondent / Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 praying to enlarge the
petitioners on bail concerned in Crime No.47 of 2026 on the file of the
Inspector of Police, CCD-I, CCW-SCCIC, Ashok Nagar, Chennai.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Parthiban
For Respondent : Mr.C.R.Malarvannan,
Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
For Intervenor : Mr.Vijayan Subramanian
CRL.O.P.NO.12155 OF 2026
Srinath @ Sriram ... Petitioner / A6
Vs.
The State Rep. By
Inspector of Police
CCW - State Cyber Crime Investigation
Centre Police Station,
CCD-I, Chennai - 600 083.
(Crime No.47 of 2026) ... Respondent / Complainant
Page No.2 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.L. O.P. Nos.11588, 12481, 12155 & 11573 of 2026
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 praying to pass an
order enlarging the petitioner / 6th accused on bail in Crime No.47 of 2016
pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Prabhakaran
For Respondent : Mr.C.R.Malarvannan
Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
For Intervenor : Mr.Vijayan Subramanian
CRL.O.P.NO.11573 OF 2026
1.Sanjay
2.Bala @ Balakrishnan
3.Manigandan
4.Ruthran ... Petitioners / Accused
Vs.
The State Rep. By
Inspector of Police
State Cyber Crime Investigation Centre,
Cyber Crime Wing, Hqrs,
Chennai.
(Crime No.47 of 2026) ... Respondent / Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 praying to release the
petitioner on bail connected in crime No.47 of 2026 pending investigation
on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioners : Mr.I.V.Kabilan
For Respondent : Mr.C.R.Malarvannan
Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
For Intervenor : Mr.Vijayan Subramanian
Page No.3 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.L. O.P. Nos.11588, 12481, 12155 & 11573 of 2026
COMMON ORDER
The captioned petitions are filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking bail by the petitioners / accused
persons who were charged with the offences under Sections 61 (2), 306,
316(2) & 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections
43 & 66, 66(B) and (C) read with 84B of the Information Technology Act,
2000, and Sections 51, 63 (a) & 65, 65A, 65B of the Copyright Act, 1957,
and Section 6AB read with Section 7(1A) of the Cinematograph Act, 1952,
in Crime No.47 of 2026 on the file of respondent-police.
2. The petitioners in C.R.L. O.P. Nos.11573, 11588 & 12155 of 2026
were arrested on April 11, 2026 and remanded to judicial custody on April
12, 2026. The petitioners in C.R.L. O.P. No.12481 of 2026 was arrested on
April 15, 2026 and remanded to judicial custody on the same day viz.,
April 15, 2026.
3. 'K.V.N. Productions L.L.P.' is the intervenor in all the Criminal
Original Petitions.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.L. O.P. Nos.11588, 12481, 12155 & 11573 of 2026
4. Case of the prosecution is that the petitioners / accused persons
pirated the film 'Jananayagan' produced by 'K.V.N. Productions L.L.P.'
even before its CBFC certification and theatrical release. According to the
prosecution, one Pradeep is the editor of the film. The petitioner / Accused
No.1- Prasanth being a freelance editor under him, accessed the computer
in which the original print of the film was stored, copied it to a hard disk
with the help of the petitioner / Accused No.2 - Selvam, and then, Accused
Nos.1 and 2 watched the same along with Accused Nos.3 and 4, who are
all close friends. Further, they circulated the same in multiple online and
social platforms in a mass scale and also thereby reaped monetary benefits.
In short, prosecution's case is that the petitioners / accused persons illegally
accessed, pirated, watched and mass circulated the film, and thereby
committed breach of trust and caused a huge financial loss to the
production company.
5. Mr.Rajadurai, learned Counsel representing Mr.R.Parthiban,
learned Counsel on record for the petitioners in C.R.L. O.P. No.12481 of
2026 / Accused Nos.1, 2 & 4 submits that Accused Nos.1 and 2 are
detained under Tamil Nadu Act No.14 of 1982 (Goondas Act). Hence, he
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.L. O.P. Nos.11588, 12481, 12155 & 11573 of 2026
not presses the Criminal Original Petition qua Accused Nos.1 and 2 and
hence, the same is hereby dismissed as not pressed by this Court qua
Accused Nos.1 and 2.
5.1. Learned Counsel further submits that Accused Nos.1, 2 and 4
(Prasanth, Selvam and Rajini) are brothers. Accused No.4 - Rajini is a
practicing advocate who is in no way connected with the offences alleged.
Accused No.4 did not commit any offence as alleged. He did not copy,
download, pirate, forward, upload or disseminate the film in any manner.
There is no incriminating material against Accused No.4. He has deep
roots in the society and has been under incarceration since April 15, 2026.
He is ready to co-operate with the investigation and also to abide by any
conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Accordingly, he prays to
grant bail to Accused No.4 - Rajini.
6. Mr.I.V.Kabilan, learned Counsel for the petitioners in C.R.L. O.P.
No. 11573 of 2026 / Accused Nos.7 to 10 submits that Accused No.7 -
Bala @ Balakrishnan is detained under Tamil Nadu Act No.14 of 1982
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.L. O.P. Nos.11588, 12481, 12155 & 11573 of 2026
(Goondas Act). Hence, he not presses the Criminal Original Petition qua
Accused No.7 and hence, the same is hereby dismissed qua Accused No.7.
6.1. As regards Accused Nos.8 & 9 (Sanjay & Manikandan), learned
Counsel fairly submits that, being huge fans of the protagonist of the film,
they merely watched the pirated copy of the film out of curiosity and did
nothing more; they did not steal, pirate or circulate the same. As regards
Accused No.10 - Rudran, he submits that he did not commit any offence as
alleged; he did not even watch the film. He has been falsely foisted in the
case merely because he is a friend of Accused Nos.8 & 9. Accused Nos.8
to 10 are ready to co-operate with the investigating agency. They are also
ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.
Accordingly, he prays to grant bail to Accused Nos.8 to 10.
7. Mr.G.Prabakaran, learned Counsel for petitioner in C.R.L. O.P.
No. 12155 of 2026 / Accused No.6 - Srinath @ Sriram submits that
Accused No.6 merely watched the film out of curiosity and did not commit
any other offence as alleged. Further, the respondent - police failed to serve
grounds of arrest and '41 A Notice' to Accused No.6. Accused No.6 has
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.L. O.P. Nos.11588, 12481, 12155 & 11573 of 2026
been under incarceration since April 12, 2026. Considering the period of
incarceration, further detention would not be necessary. He is permanently
employed in a renowned private company. He is ready to co-operate with
the investigation and also to abide by any conditions that may be imposed
by this Court. Accordingly, he prays to grant bail to Accused No.6 - Srinath
@ Sriram.
8. Ms.J.Kamalini, learned Counsel for petitioner in C.R.L. O.P. No.
11588 of 2026 / Accused No.5 - Rajesh submits that Accused No.5 merely
watched the film out of curiosity and did not commit any other offence as
alleged. Accused No.5 has been under incarceration since April 12, 2026.
Considering the period of incarceration, further detention would not be
necessary. He is permanently employed in the same renowned private
company as Accused No.6 - Srinath @ Sriram. He is ready to co-operate
with the investigation and also to abide by any conditions that may be
imposed by this Court. Accordingly, he prays to grant bail to Accused
No.5- Rajesh.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.L. O.P. Nos.11588, 12481, 12155 & 11573 of 2026
9. Opposing the above submissions, Mr.C.R.Malarvannan, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent - police submits that
Accused Nos.1 and 2 pirated the film and watched it along with Accused
Nos.3 to 5. Further, Accused No.5 shared the pirated copy with Accused
No.6 who in turn forwarded the same to Accused Nos.7 to 10. All the
accused persons forwarded / uploaded the pirated version of the film across
multiple online and social media platforms. Notably, Accused No.7 - Bala
openly created a Drive link containing the pirated version of the film
which was accessed by about 1,20,00,000 people.
9.1. Further, as regards Accused No.4 - Rajini, he submits that being
an advocate is all the more reason not to watch a pirated version of a film,
that too before its CBFC Certification and theatrical release. Apart from
watching, Accused No.4 had aided the other accused persons in circulating
the pirated version of the film knowing fully well that it is an offence.
9.2. He further submits that the accused persons have caused several
hundred crores of loss to the production company. Investigation is not yet
completed. Digital records of circulation, uploads, downloads, etc. are
collected and currently pending before Forensic Science Laboratory for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.L. O.P. Nos.11588, 12481, 12155 & 11573 of 2026
analysis. The analysis is pending and the digital records have not been
completely decoded. Further, requested details of online monetary
transactions are yet to be received. Accused No.3 is currently absconding.
The complete role of each and every accused persons would come to light
only after arrest and investigation of Accused No.3. In these circumstances,
if bail is granted to accused persons, they would erase the evidence and
hamper the investigation. Accordingly, the learned Additional Public
Prosecutor vehemently objects to grant of bail to the accused persons.
10. Mr.Vijayan Subramanian, learned Counsel for the intervenor
emphasises on the huge amount of loss suffered by the intervenor -
production company, and submits that the offence not merely involves a
private dispute but a co-ordinated act of digital piracy affecting the entire
film industry. This is not a partial or isolated leakage but the entire film has
been unlawfully copied and disseminated. Consequently, the market value
of the film is wiped out and not only the theatrical prospects are shattered
but also the OTT, satellite and distribution rights are jeopardized. Further
reiterating the submissions made by the learned Additional Public
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.L. O.P. Nos.11588, 12481, 12155 & 11573 of 2026
Prosecutor, he vehemently opposes grant of bail to accused persons and
seeks to dismiss the Criminal Original Petitions.
11. Considered the submissions on either sides. Perused the
materials available on record including the Case Diary.
12. The Investigating Agency has collected mobile phone and other
gadgets from the accused persons and sent the same for forensic analysis.
The digital records which are essential to trace down the digital footprints,
have not yet been decoded completely. The Investigating Agency has
further sought for details regarding online monetary transactions from
multiple giant online companies and platforms, which are yet to be
received. Further, Accused No.3 - Uma Shankar is absconding. Material
facts, particulars, fresh perspectives and circumstances could possibly
emerge after receiving the aforesaid information or upon arrest and
investigation of Accused No.3, which would necessitate the Investigation
Agency to conduct further investigation on the accused persons based on
the same, to unearth the truth and ascertain the role of each and every
accused person. There is high possibility that if bail is granted to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.L. O.P. Nos.11588, 12481, 12155 & 11573 of 2026
petitioners / accused persons, they may erase the evidence and hinder the
process of investigation. Further, the ramifications of the crime extends
beyond the massive financial loss suffered by the production company;
hard work and future of several people connected with the film is
jeopardized. Hence, given the current stage of investigation, this Court is
not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners / accused persons. Therefore, all
the captioned Criminal Original Petitions are hereby dismissed. Connected,
Civil Miscellaneous Petitions (Intervening Petitions) are closed.
22.05.2026
Index : Yes / No
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
Speaking Order : Yes / No
TK
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.L. O.P. Nos.11588, 12481, 12155 & 11573 of 2026
To
1.The XI Metropolitan Magistrate
Saidapet,
Chennai.
2.The Superintendent of Prison
Puzhal,
Chennai.
3.The Inspector of Police
CCD - I, CCW - SCCIC,
Chennai.
4.The Public Prosecutor
Madras High Court
Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.L. O.P. Nos.11588, 12481, 12155 & 11573 of 2026
R.SAKTHIVEL, J.
TK
CRL OP NOS.11588, 12481, 12155 & 11573 OF 2026
AND
CRL.MP.NOS.8613, 8866, 8867 & 8618 OF 2026
22.05.2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
