Tharun Anand @ Tharun vs The State

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.09.2026 for the alleged offence under Section 11(1), 11(4) r/w 12 of POCSO Act 2012 & 351(2) BNS & 4 of TNPHW Act, in Crime No.26 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that it is a case of harassment of minor girl. The petitioner continuously stalked and threatened the victim child in order to make her love him. Based on the complaint given by the father of the victim child, a criminal case has been registered.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the Petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and submited that the investigation is still pending. Hence, he strongly opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

I have perused the statement of the victim child, who was examined under Section 183 of the BNSS. It is seen that an earlier complaint was lodged at the Thousand Lights Police Station. During the enquiry, the petitioner appeared before the respondent Police and gave a written undertaking that he would not disturb the victim child. However, thereafter, he allegedly waylaid the victim child and thratened to throw acid on her face.

Considering the nature of the allegations, the age of the victim child and the petitioner, and the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases Under POCSO Act Chennai, and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall file an affidavit before the learned Judicial Magistrate undertaking that he will not indulge in any such kind of activities in future and will not waylay, threaten, or otherwise disturb the victim child or interfere with her normal activities. In the event of any complaint being received against him, the bail granted to the petitioner shall stand cancelled automatically;

[c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

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

[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[f] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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 Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

Note: