[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
Anitha vs State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police on 22 May, 2026
CRL OP No. 13498 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22-05-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL
CRL OP No. 13498 of 2026
1. Anitha
2. Govardhan
..Petitioner/A3 & A2
Vs
State rep by, The Inspector of Police,
Arakkonam Taluk Police Station,
Arakkonam,
Ranipet District.
Crime No. Not known of 2026.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER :- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) Act, 2023, praying to enlarge the
petitioners on the pre-arrest in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime
No. Not known of 2026, pending investigation on the file of the respondent and
thereby render justice.
For Petitioners: Mr.P. Krishnan
For Respondent: Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar
Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
Assisted by Mr.A. Mohammed Imran
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioners on
19.05.2026 under Section 482 of BNSS Act, 2023 praying to grant an order of
pre-arrest bail.
__________
Page1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. The petitioners apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent Police
for the offences punishable under Sections 5(1), 6(1), 17 and 21(1) of POCSO
Act, 2012, Section 9 of the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 and Section 87
of Bharatiya Nagarik Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.304 of 2025 on the file of the
respondent police.
3. The case of prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the
mother of the victim girl. On 25.07.2025 the victim girl went to college and she
was not returned to her home so initially the girl missing complaint was lodged
by her mother and subsequently, it was altered to POCSO Act. Hence, the
complaint was registered against the petitioners.
4. Mr.P. Krishnan, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the
petitioners are mother/A3 and father/A2 of the main accused/A1 in this case. He
submits that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed
any offence as alleged by the prosecution and a false case has been foisted
against the petitioners. He further submits that the main accused/Jaganathan @
Rahul/A1 has already been granted pre-arrest bail by this Court in Crl.OP
No.714 of 2026 dated 19.01.2026. He however submits that the petitioners are
ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. He therefore
prays for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners.
__________
Page2 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. Mr. R. Ganesh Kumar, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side),
assisted by Mr.A.Mohammed Imran, appearing for the respondent police
reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions submitted that, it is a case
of penetrative sexual assault caused by A1/Jaganathan @ Rahul and the
investigation in this case is still progressing. The learned counsel also produced
the copy of the statement recorded from the victim girl under Section 183 of
BNSS. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss this Criminal Original Petition.
6. This Court has perused the statement recorded from the victim girl in
which she has narrated various incidents and it is the case of aggravated
penetrative sexual assault. However, it is revealed that the family members of
the victim were aware about the occurrence and they have not taken any steps.
It is also stated that the victim girl has also became pregnant and subsequently,
suffered a miscarriage.
7. In view of the offence alleged against the petitioners, this Court is of
the view that custodial interrogation of the Petitioners may not be necessary in
this case. The petitioners have permanent residence and deep roots in the
society. Therefore, there is less possibility for absconding. Considering the
above and also considering the manner in which the occurrence has taken place
__________
Page3 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
and considering the age of the victim girl, and stage of the investigation, this
Court is inclined to grant an order of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners subject to
the following conditions.
(i) The petitioners shall be released on pre-arrest bail in the event of their
arrest or in the event of their surrender before the learned Judicial Magistrate
Court I, Arakkonam, within a period of 15 days from date on which the order
copy is made ready, on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand only) along with two sureties each for a like sum of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial
Magistrate Court I, Arakkonam.
(ii) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression
in the Application for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The
Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The Judicial Magistrate Court I, Arakkonam
shall obtain a copy of any one of identity proofs to ensure their identity.
(iii) The petitioners shall appear and sign before the respondent-
police weekly twice i.e., every Monday and Friday at 10.00 a.m. until
further orders.
(iv) The petitioners shall make themself available for interrogation by a
police officer as and when required.
(v) The petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement,
__________
Page4 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
(vi) The petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, cause any threat to the
defacto complainant, the victim girl and witnesses and shall not tamper the
evidence.
(vii) The petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission
of the Court.
(viii) The petitioners shall not enter into the defacto complainant's house
or her wok place and shall also not try to contact the defacto complainant,
victim and their family members either directly or through any electronic mode.
(ix) The petitioners shall furnish their residential address and mobile
number to the learned Judicial Magistrate Court I, Arakkonam.
(x) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned
Judicial Magistrate Court I, Arakkonam or Trial Court, as the case may be, is
entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioners in accordance with law
as if the aforementioned conditions are imposed by them as laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K. Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283].
__________
Page5 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed subject to the
conditions stated supra.
22-05-2026
gbi/klt
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 official website of this
Court will be watermarked and will
also have a QR code.
To
1. The Judicial Magistrate Court I,
Arakkonam.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Arakkonam Taluk Police Station,
Arakkonam,
Ranipet District.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
__________
Page6 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.SAKTHIVEL, J.
GBI
22-05-2026
__________
Page7 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
