Dismissed¶¶52

Anand Madhavan v. The State rep.by

Madras HC17 Jun 2025CRL OP/14453/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court bail denial 2025; false promise of marriage; consensual relationship dispute; voyeuristic covert recording; Telegram group; 40+ pornographic websites; five folders; multiple victims; Section 183(5) BNSS statement; custodial interrogation; crucial stage of investigation; Sections 354A 354C 509 IPC; Section 69 BNS 2023; Sections 66E 67 67A IT Act 2000; Section 4 TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act 1998; Section 483 BNSS; Crime No.21/2025 Cyber Crime Wing Chennai; Crl.O.P. dismissed; intervening petition ordered.

What did the court decide?

No relief to petitioner - bail refused; the intervening petition of the defacto complainant (Crl.M.P.No.10467 of 2025) was ordered. ¶¶52

Anand Madhavan Vs The State rep.by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to petitioner - bail refused; the intervening petition of the defacto complainant (Crl.M.P.No.10467 of 2025) was ordered.

¶¶52

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, arrested in Crime No.21/2025 (Cyber Crime Wing, Delta-2, Chennai) for offences under Ss.354A, 354C and 509 IPC, S.69 BNS 2023, Ss.66E, 67 and 67A IT Act 2000 and S.4 TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act 1998, should be enlarged on bail under Section 483 BNSS. +2 more

¶¶9

Court's answer

On perusal of the materials and the statement under Section 183(5) BNSS, the Court found that the petitioner expressed love to the defacto complainant, had physical relations on several occasions, recorded their private moments in his mobile phone without her knowledge, and uploaded obscene photos and videos in 40 plus websites and a Telegram group.

¶¶46

Ratio / Principle

The Court rejected the petitioner's contention that the uploading of photos and videos was neither deliberate nor intentional, in view of the finding of five folders maintained by the petitioner.

¶¶50

Key takeaways

The Court held that other victims' statements were yet to be recorded, custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required, the investigation was at a crucial stage, and granting bail would be detrimental to the investigation.ratio¶¶50
Taking into consideration the serious offence committed by the petitioner, the Court was not inclined to grant bail and dismissed the Criminal Original Petition.ratio¶¶51

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BAIL REFUSED - High Court of Judicature at Madras (M. Nirmal Kumar, J.), Crl.O.P.No.14453 of 2025, pronounced 17.06.2025: Application under S.483 BNSS by Anand Madhavan, arrested and remanded on 10.04.2025 in Crime No.21/2025 (Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Wing, Delta-2, Chennai) for Ss.354A, 354C and 509 IPC, S.69 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, Ss.66E, 67 and 67A IT Act 2000 and S.4 TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act 1998. Prosecution case: physical relationship with his law-college batchmate on repeated promises of marriage; covert recording of intimate moments; uploading of obscene photos/videos to a Telegram group and 40+ websites after the relationship soured. Petitioner pleaded the leak was inadvertent (spam-link click) and the relationship consensual; the Court rejected the plea on finding five folders maintained by him, noting four more victims (one had given a Magistrate statement; three sought anonymity), pending victim statements, need for custodial interrogation and the crucial stage of investigation; bail denied as detrimental to investigation. Defacto complainant's intervening petition Crl.M.P.No.10467 of 2025 ordered; petition dismissed.

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.14453 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

RESERVED ON : 10.06.2025 PRONOUNCED ON : 17.06.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.14453 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.10467 of 2025

¶7

Anand Madhavan ... Petitioner Vs.

¶8

The State rep by The Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Wing, Delta-2, Chennai-600007. ... Respondent

¶9

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 483 of BNSS, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.21/2025 on the file of the respondent Police with any stringent condition.

¶10

For Petitioner	:	Mr.R.C.Paul Kanagaraj
For Respondent	:	Mr.L.Baskaran,
		Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
For Intervenor	:	Mr.Sudhathiran.S

¶11

Page No.1 of 10

¶12

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

¶13

Crl.O.P.No.14453 of 2025

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 10.04.2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 354A, 354C and 509 IPC, Section 69 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 66E, 67, and 67A of Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998 in connection with Crime No.21 of 2025 on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.

¶16

2.The gist of the prosecution case is that the defacto complainant was studying B.B.A., L.L.B (Hons.) in School of Excellence in Law, Taramani, Chennai in the year 2017 and the petitioner was studying B.C.A., L.L.B (Hons.) in the same college. During that time, the petitioner expressed his love and promised to marry her. After sometime, the defacto complainant accepted the proposal of the petitioner and they entered into relationship in the year 2020. During the love relationship, the petitioner would often take the defacto complainant out. On one occasion, the petitioner made promise to defacto complainant that he would marry her before going abroad, thereafter, he will take her abroad and attempted to have physical

¶17

Page No.2 of 10

¶18

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

¶19

Crl.O.P.No.14453 of 2025

¶20

relationship with her, but she refused. On 21.03.2022, on the false promise of marriage, petitioner had physical relationship with the defacto complainant in his car in Besant Nagar near Elliott Road. Thereafter, on one occasion, the petitioner informed the defacto complainant that he disclosed the love relationship to his parents and there was no opposition in his house for getting married with the defacto complainant and that after completing studies, both of them can get married and go abroad and again on the false promise, the petitioner had physical relationship with her in his Swift car in Perungudi.

¶21

3.After completion of college in the year 2022, the petitioner went abroad for higher education. Thereafter, whenever the defacto complainant asked the petitioner for marriage, the petitioner avoided the same by one reason or other, thereafter, reduced his regular phone calls to the defacto complainant. In December 2023, when the petitioner came to Chennai from abroad, he informed the defacto complainant that both of them can get married, go abroad and live happily together. On 19.11.2024, the petitioner forced the defacto complainant to have physical relationship in his Swift

¶22

Page No.3 of 10

¶23

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

¶24

Crl.O.P.No.14453 of 2025

¶25

car, when the defacto complainant refused, he scolded and threatened her that he had recorded the private physical moments in his mobile and he would upload the obscene photos and videos in social media. Thereafter, the defacto complainant came to know through her friends that the petitioner uploaded the private photos and videos in Telegram group and in 40 plus websites. Hence, she lodged a complaint to the respondent Police.

¶26

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and defacto complainant are law graduates and they were in a consensual relationship, at no point of time, the petitioner forced the defacto complainant to have physical relationship. He further submits that the intimate recordings mentioned in the complaint were made with full knowledge and consent of the defacto complainant. While attempting to secure the private photos and videos, the petitioner inadvertently clicked on a spam link while browsing online. As a result, the photos and videos leaked via Telegram and other websites. This was neither deliberate nor intentional. He further submits that due to difference of opinion between them, dispute arose in the relationship. Taking advantage of the same, the

¶27

Page No.4 of 10

¶28

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

¶29

Crl.O.P.No.14453 of 2025

¶30

defacto complainant demanded huge amount as lump sum from the petitioner, the petitioner not acceded to the demand.

¶31

5.The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is a practicing Advocate in the Madras High Court and he has deep roots in society. The allegations in the FIR arise from a personal relationship between the petitioner and the defacto complainant which subsequently turned strained due to difference of opinion. He further submits that the respondent Police seized the mobile and the chats between the petitioner and the defacto complainant will reveal the innocence of the petitioner. Further, the leaked video content in the website removed and the mobile and other electronic devices are with the respondent Police. The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 10.04.2025 and he is under judicial custody from then on, hence, prays for bail.

¶32

6.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police produced the statement under Section 183(5) of BNSS and submitted that the petitioner expressed his love and promised to marry

¶33

Page No.5 of 10

¶34

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

¶35

Crl.O.P.No.14453 of 2025

¶36

her and had physical relationship with her. Thereafter, the petitioner moved abroad for higher education promising her that he would marry her after she completed her studies. On the other hand, when the defacto complainant requested the petitioner to marry her, he avoided and neglected but insisted to have physical relationship which she resisted, thereafter, the petitioner abused and threatened her that he would publish private photos and videos to everyone and would upload the same in social media. Further, the petitioner claimed that the defacto complainant is not the only person and he is having similar relationship with many girls. The defacto complainant later came to know in January, 2025 that the petitioner without her knowledge recorded their private moments, uploaded the same in a Telegram Group and also 40 plus websites. He further submits that the mobile phone and other electronic devices of the petitioner seized and steps were taken to remove the obscene photos and videos from the Telegram and also from the websites. Now, the investigation is going on and further custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much necessary. Now, it has come to light that the petitioner has only recorded the private moments, but with four more girls maintaining separate folder for each victims. All have

¶37

Page No.6 of 10

¶38

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

¶39

Crl.O.P.No.14453 of 2025

¶40

been uploaded in social media which are in circulation. One more victim has now come forwarded and gave statement before the Magistrate. The remaining three victims sought for anonymity to disclose the atrocities committed by the petitioner to them. Hence, he strongly opposed for grant of bail.

¶41

7.The learned counsel for the defacto complainant/Intervenor filed Intervening Petition and submitted that the petitioner deceived the defacto complainant by false promise of marriage and had physical relationship with her and recorded the same in his mobile phone without her knowledge. It is also revealed that the petitioner was involved in recording explicit videos with many girls, storing them in his mobile phone and uploading them into social media. The defacto complainant came to know through her friends that her videos have been uploaded in 40 plus pornographic websites and also in a Telegram group. He further submits that the video which was uploaded was intentional with a malafide to destroy the life of the defacto complainant and to keep the victims at bay. In the statement under Section 183(5) of BNSS, the defacto complainant clearly stated about the indecent

¶42

Page No.7 of 10

¶43

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

¶44

Crl.O.P.No.14453 of 2025

¶45

act committed by the petitioner and also clearly stated the date and the place where the petitioner had physical relationship with her. He further submitted that the offence committed by the petitioner needs further and indepth investigation. The act of the petitioner exploiting several girls cannot be termed as an act of consensus. It is a crime against the society, exploiting innocent victims projected them as public property. Hence, he strongly opposed for grant of bail.

¶46

8.Considering the rival submissions and on perusal of the materials and also the statement under Section 183(5) of BNSS, it is seen that the petitioner expressed his love to the defacto complainant and had a physical relationship on several occasions. Not stopping with that, the petitioner recorded the private moments in his mobile phone without the knowledge of the defacto complainant and uploaded the obscene photos and videos in 40 plus websites and also in a Telegram Group. In the statement under Section 183(5) of BNSS, the defacto complainant stated about their love relationship while they were studying in School of Excellence in Law, Taramani, Chennai and also the time and place where the petitioner had

¶47

Page No.8 of 10

¶48

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

¶49

Crl.O.P.No.14453 of 2025

¶50

physical relationship. The contention of the petitioner that uploading of photos and videos in a social media is neither deliberate nor intentional, cannot be accepted in view of finding five folders maintained by the petitioner. As regards other victims, now one more victim has given statement. The statement of the victims are yet to be recorded. For which, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required. The investigation is at the crucial stage. Granting bail to the petitioner will be detrimental to the investigation.

¶51

9.Taking into consideration the serious offence committed by the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶52

10.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. The Intervening Petition in Crl.M.P.No.10467 of 2025 in Crl.O.P.No.14453 of 2025 is ordered.

¶53

17.06.2025

¶54

Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No vv2

¶55

Page No.9 of 10

¶56

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

¶57

Crl.O.P.No.14453 of 2025

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

vv2

Note:

1.Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

¶62

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.

¶63

¶64