Manikandan .S v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Awps

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 06.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 6172 of 2026 S.Manikandan ... Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station Dindigul Rural, Dindigul District. (Crime No.02 of 2025)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Balaji

Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 02 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

24.01.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 87, 127(2), 351(3)BNS Act 2023 and Section 11 (4), 12, 5(f), 5(1) and 6 of POCSO Act 2012. in Spl.S.C.No.92 of 2025 on the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Casesunder POCSO Act, Dindigul, in Crime No.2 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶2This is the third bail application before this Court. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the Tamil Teacher and he called the victim who is aged about 16 yeas and penetrative sexual assault on her several times and also threatened her with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.

¶3The 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 ready and willing to abide by any conditions which may be imposed by this Court and he is in judicial custody from 24.01.2025, for more than one year. Hence, he seeks bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has also been filed. He further submitted that previously the petitioner was detained under Goondas Act and he had involved in a very henious offence. Hence, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶5This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶6Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, considering the nature of allegation, already investigation is completed and the case is pending in trial stage in Spl.S.C.No.92 of 2025, victim was examined and cross examined by the accused, and also considering the period of incarceration of the petitioner from 24.01.2025, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute 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 District and Sessions Judge, Special Court for the Exclusive trial of POCSO Act Cases, Dindigul and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the District and Sessions Judge, Special Court for the Exclusive trial of POCSO Act Cases, Dindigul, at 10.30 a.m., on all working days until further orders; [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she 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 her 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 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 269 BNS.

(P D B J)

06.04.2026 TM

To

1.The District and Sessions Judge, Special Court for the Exclusive trial of POCSO Act Cases, Dindigul.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Dindigul Rural, Dindigul District. (Crime No.02 of 2025)

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Madurai.

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

P. DHANABAL, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6172 of 2026 Date : 06.04.2026