Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Selva Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by

Selva vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jul 01, 2026
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1662847

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
CRL OP(MD)/12987/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Selva

Respondent

The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by

Excerpt

.....for the offences punishable under sections 75(2) and 79 of bns, in crime no.864 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.2. the case of the prosecution is that the petitioner herein was running amobile service shop and the defacto complainant, who is a lady, has handed over her cell phone for some service. taking advantage of the same, the petitioner, has sent obscene video clips to the defacto complainant and made sexual demand. hence, the case.3. the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that thepetitioner 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 he is in custody from 09.06.2026 and ready to abide any condition imposed by this court. hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.4. the learned counsel appearing for the state reiterated the prosecution case and reported that it is a case of single accused. investigation in this case is going on. he opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.5. this court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.6. considering the facts and circumstances of the case, investigation inthis case is going on, the petitioner has no previous case and also considering the period of incarceration, i am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to certain conditions. [a] accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned judicial magistrate, valliyoor, tirunelveli district, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks, thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission.....

Full Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 01.07.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No. 12987 of 2026 Selva ...Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Panagudi Police Station, Tirunelveli District. (Crime No.864 of 2026) ...Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.S.Palanivelayutham Advocate For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 864 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.06.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 75(2) and 79 of BNS, in Crime No.864 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner herein was running a

mobile service shop and the defacto complainant, who is a lady, has handed over her cell phone for some service. Taking advantage of the same, the petitioner, has sent obscene video clips to the defacto complainant and made sexual demand. Hence, the case.

3. 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 he is in custody from 09.06.2026 and ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Counsel appearing for the State reiterated the prosecution case and reported that it is a case of single accused. Investigation in this case is going on. He opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, investigation in

this case is going on, the petitioner has no previous case and also considering the period of incarceration, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to certain conditions. [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks, thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [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; [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any

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 Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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 Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 51730]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS. (K R S J) 01.07.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Panagudi Police Station, Tirunelveli District. (Crime No.864 of 2026) 3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli District. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 12987 of 2026 Date : 01.07.2026

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial