IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

S.Vignesh ...Appellant

-vs-

1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,

Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police,

Villupuram.

2.The State Rep by Inspector of Police,

AWPS-Gingee Police Station,

Villupuram

Crime No.33 of 2025

3.Adithya ...Respondents

PRAYER: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Amendment Act) Cr.P.C), to set aside the order dated 12.11.2025 made in Crl.M.P.No.360 of 2025 on the filed of Sessions Judge, Special Court For Exclusive Trial of Cases registered under the SC and ST (POA) Act, 1989 in connection with the crime number 33 of 2025 on the file of the 2^nd

respondent police by allowing this criminal appeal.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Iyyapparaj For R1 & R2 : Mr.S.Balaji Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

For R3 : Ms.S.Sridevi, Legal aid Cousel

ORDER

The criminal appeal has been filed challenging the order in Crl.M.P.

No.360 of 2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court For Exclusive Trial of Cases registered under SC and ST (POA) Act, Villupuram.

2. The appellant was arrested on 15.09.2025 in connection with the investigation in Crime No.33 of 2025 for the offences under Section

332(c) and 69 of BNSS, 2023.

3. The allegation is that the appellant and the victim girl had love affair; that the appellant had promised to marry the victim girl and had sexual intercourse with the her, as a result of which the victim girl became pregnant and delivered a child; and that thereafter, the appellant refused to marry the victim girl and thus, committed the aforesaid offences.

4. The Trial Court had dismissed the bail application on the ground that the appellant was likely to tamper with the witnesses and that, considering the gravity of the offence, he was not entitled to bail.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that, admittedly, it is the case of love affair; that the appellant is in custody from 15.09.2025 for more than three months; that further incarceration of the appellant is not required for the purpose of investigation. He would further submit that the appellant is ready to abide by any stringent conditions imposed by this Court for his release on bail; and that the appellant would deposit a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to the credit of Crime No.33 of 2025 without prejudice to his rights and that the victim girl may be permitted to withdraw the said amount for the welfare of the child.

6. Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), who reiterated the averments made in the FIR and submitted that the investigation has been completed; and that the respondent filed the final report through e-filing before the jurisdictional Magistrate.

7. Though notice has been served on the victim girl, the 3^rd respondent, none had entered appearance. Hence, this Court appointed Ms.S.Sridevi (MS.No.924/1998) as legal aid counsel to appear on behalf of the 3^rd respondent.

8. The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent would submit that the appellant is guilty of a grave offence; that the victim girl is now required to raise the child. She also further submitted that, considering the gravity of offence and other circumstances, the impugned order dismissing the bail application cannot be faulted and therefore, opposed the grant of bail.

9. Admittedly, the appellant and victim girl had a love affair and both are aged 19 years. The appellant is in custody since 15.09.2025. The respondent has filed the final report. Hence, this Court is of the view that further incarceration of the appellant is not required for the purpose of investigation. That apart, the appellant has volunteered to deposit a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to the credit of Crime No.33 of 2025 and has no objection for the victim girl to withdraw the same. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appellant is released on bail on the following conditions:

(i) The appellant shall depos