Disposed¶31

Selvam v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC21 Jan 2025CRL OP(MD)/133/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRL OP(MD) No.133 of 2025; Selvam v. State of Tamil Nadu (Inspector of Police, Rajapalayam All Women's Police Station, Virudhunagar District); anticipatory bail; Sec. 482 BNSS; Sections 351(2) and 296(b) BNS; Sec 9(m) & 10 POCSO Act; Crime No. 38 of 2024; CCTV footage pendrive; status report; investigation dropped as mistake of fact; RCS notice 15.01.2025; petition disposed 21.01.2025; Justice N. Anand Venkatesh; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of after recording the police status report; no bail order made as the apprehension of arrest ceased once the investigation was dropped as mistake of fact. ¶31

Selvam Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.133 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 21/01/2025

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶7

CRL OP(MD). No.133 of 2025

¶8

Selvam ... Petitioner/Sole Accused

¶9

¶10

The State of Tamil Nadu,, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Rajapalayam All Women's Police Station, Virudhunagar District. (Cr. No. 38 of 2024). ... Respondent/Complainant

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Sankarapandian,

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶13

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS

¶14

PRAYER :-

¶15

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 38 of 2024 on the file of the respondent Police.

¶16

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

¶17

1/4

¶18

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶19

CRL OP(MD). No.133 of 2025

¶20

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 351(2) and 296(b) of BNS (hereinafter referred to as new penal code) and Sec 9(m) & 10 of POCSO Act in Crime No.38 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶21

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is said to have misbehaved with the victim girl aged about 10 years and tried to harass her.

¶22

3.When the matter came up for hearing on 07.01.2025, this Court passed the following order:

¶23

"The petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent police for enquiry on 09.01.2025 at 11.00 a.m.

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that CCTV footage which was recorded in a pendrive will also be produced before the respondent police. After recording the statement of the petitioner and going through the material, the respondent police shall

¶25

instruct the learned Government Advocate. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

2/4

¶27

CRL OP(MD). No.133 of 2025

¶28

Post this case on 21.01.2025. In the meantime, the petitioner shall not be arrested."

¶29

4.Pursuant to the above order, the petitioner attended enquiry before the

¶30

respondent police and also produced the CCTV footage which was recorded in a pendrive. After enquiring the petitioner, a status report has been filed before this Court and on carefully going through the status report, it is seen that the respondent police have come to a conclusion that no offence has taken place as alleged by the defacto complainant and accordingly, the investigation itself has been dropped as mistake of fact and RCS notice has also been served on the defacto complainant on 15.01.2025.

¶31

5.In the light of the above development, there is no apprehension of arrest of the petitioner and recording the status report filed before this Court, this criminal original petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

21.01.2025

// True Copy //

/01 /2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.I/II/III/IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶36

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

¶37

3/4