Allowed

G.Marimuthu v. The State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC7 Jul 2026CRL OP(MD)/13450/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused arrested for offences under POCSO and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act after allegedly tying thali on a 17-year-old girl sought bail. Considering the victim's statement, nature of offence and period of incarceration, the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) granted bail with conditions including bonds and daily police reporting.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on bond of Rs.15,000 with two like sureties, subject to daily police reporting for two weeks and standard conditions against absconding and evidence tampering.

G.Marimuthu Vs The State of Tamilnadu — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13450 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 07.07.2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR

¶7

CRL OP(MD). No. 13450 of 2026

G.Marimuthu

...Petitioner

State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Alangulam, Madurai District. (Crime No.14 of 2026)

¶12

...Respondent/Complainant

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Saasan Kumar Advocate

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side)

¶15

PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS

¶16

PRAYER :-

¶17

For Bail in Cr.No. 14 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

¶18

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶19

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial

¶20

custody on 16.06.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 7 & 8 of POCSO Act and Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, in Crime

¶21

1/6

¶22

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

¶23

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13450 of 2026

¶24

No.14 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶25

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner taking advantage of

¶26

the age of the victim girl forcibly tied thali, while she was in shop. Hence, the complaint was lodged and the case was registered.

¶27

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner is aged about 24 years and the victim is aged about 17 years. Only with the consent of the victim, the occurrence said to have taken place. It is not a case of any sexual assault. The petitioner is in custody from 16.06.2026 and ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

¶28

The learned Counsel appearing for the State reiterated the prosecution case and reported that the petitioner has no previous case. Investigation in this case is still pending. He opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶29

This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on

¶30

2/6

¶31

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

¶32

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13450 of 2026

¶33

record.

¶34

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the

¶35

nature of offence, considering the statement given by the victim girl and also considering the period of incarceration, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to certain conditions.

¶36

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Principal Special Court

¶37

for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Madurai , and on further conditions that:

¶38

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks, thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

¶39

[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;

¶40

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶41

3/6

¶42

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

¶43

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13450 of 2026

¶44

[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any

¶45

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

¶46

Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶47

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned

¶48

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

¶49

Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 51730].

¶50

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be

¶51

registered under Section 269 BNS.

(K R S J) 07.07.2026

1.The Sessions Judge, Principal Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Madurai.