Dismissed¶27

Sridhar v. State of Tamil Nadu Rep By The

Madras HC10 Jun 2025CRL A/574/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras HC single-judge (G.K. Ilanthiraiyan) dismisses Crl.A.No.574 of 2025 (10.06.2025) seeking bail under S.14A(2)/S.528 BNSS 2023 against Principal Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam's rejection in Crl.M.P.No.401 of 2025. Accused arrested 11.04.2025 re FIR Crime No.18 of 2025, All Women Police Station, Nagapattinam; offence: Section 69 BNS r/w Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act 2015. Themes: sexual intercourse induced on pretext/compulsion of marriage, subsequent neglect, cheating and refusal to marry SC-community victim, rape, bail denial upheld, no infirmity in trial court order. Counsel: V.Johson Yuvaraj (appellant); S.Raja Kumar APP (State and DSP).

What did the court decide?

None; the appellant was not enlarged on bail and the Criminal Appeal was dismissed. ¶27

Sridhar Vs State of Tamil Nadu Rep By The — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the appellant was not enlarged on bail and the Criminal Appeal was dismissed.

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant, arrested for the offence under Section 69 BNS r/w. Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 for allegedly inducing the victim girl into sexual intercourse on the pretext of marriage and then refusing to marry her, ought to be enlarged on bail notwithstanding the Principal Sessions Judge's rejection of his bail application.

¶14

Court's answer

The Court accepted the prosecution case that the petitioner committed rape on the victim and thereafter refused to marry her, treating the offence as very serious and heinous.

¶26

Ratio / Principle

On that basis, the trial Court was held to have rightly dismissed the bail application; this Court found no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the trial Court, and accordingly the appeal fails.

¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail refusal upheld. High Court of Judicature at Madras (G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.; decided 10.06.2025) dismissed Crl.A.No.574 of 2025, filed under Section 14A(2) r/w. Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 against the order of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam in Crl.M.P.No.401 of 2025 rejecting bail. The appellant, remanded to judicial custody on 11.04.2025 in pursuance of FIR Cr.No.18/2025 of the All Women Police Station, Nagapattinam (Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nagapattinam co-respondent), was charged under Section 69 BNS r/w. Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. Prosecution case: on the pretext of marriage and on compulsion the petitioner induced the victim girl — who belongs to the SC community — to have sexual intercourse numerous times, thereafter neglected and cheated her and, after realising she belonged to the SC Community, refused to marry her. Holding: committing rape on the victim and thereafter refusing to marry her is a very serious and heinous offence; the trial Court rightly dismissed the bail application; no infirmity or illegality found in its order; appeal fails and stands dismissed.

¶1

Crl.A.No.574 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 10.06.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

Crl.A.No.574 of 2025

¶7

Mr.Sridhar S/o. Mr.Sivalingam, No.4/17B, North Colony Street, Panangadi, Nagapattinam District – 610 201.

¶8

..... Appellant

¶9

¶10

State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Nagapattinam District. (Crime No.18 of 2025)

¶11

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nagapattinam District.

¶12

Suhma, D/o. Dhanapal, Panakadu, North Colony Street, Thirukuvalai.

¶13

..... Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14A(2) r/w. with Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.401 of 2025 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam and further enlarge the appellant on Bail in Crime No.18 of 2025 on the file of the respondent

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

¶17

police considering the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶18

For Appellant : Mr.V.Johson Yuvaraj For Respondent : Mr.S.Raja Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 and R2

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

This appeal has been preferred as against the order passed in passed in Crl.M.P.No.401 of 2025 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam, thereby rejecting bail to the petitioner.

¶21

The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 11.04.2025 in pursuance of the registration of FIR in Cr.No.18/2025 on the file of the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 69 BNS r/w. Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

¶22

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, on the pretext of marriage and on compulsion, induced the victim girl to have sexual intercourse with him for numerous time. Thereafter the petitioner neglected to marry the victim girl and cheated her. That apart, the victim girl belongs to SC Community. After realizing the fact that she belongs to SC Community, the

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

Crl.A.No.574 of 2025

¶25

petitioner refused to marry her.

¶26

The petitioner committed rape on the victim and thereafter refused to marry her. Therefore, the petitioner had committed a very serious and heinous offence against the victim and as such the trial Court has rightly dismissed the application for bail and this Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the trial Court and the appeal fails.

¶27