CRL OP No. 17239 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 17239 of 2026 1. Sundaravaradan S/o. Mannan, No. 60, Bajanai Koil Street, Kadalmangalam, Kanchipuram District. 2. Shanda Kumari W/o. Sundaravaradan, Residing at No. 60, Bajanai Koil Street, Kadalmangalam, Kanchipuram District 3. S.Naresh Venkatesan S/o. Sriraman, Residing at No.1, Road Street, Somanathapuram, Utharamerur, Kanchipuram District. 4. V.Savithri W/o.S.Naresh Venkatesan, Residing at No.1, Road Street, Somanathapuram, Utharamerur, Kanchipuram District. ..Petitioners Vs https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17239 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 5 The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Kanchipuram, Kanchipuram District. Cr.No.36 of 2026. ..Respondent PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 428 of BNSS, praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of the arrest in Cr.No.36 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Dhaani Dharan For Respondent(s): Mr.N.Palanivel Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 9, 10, 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act in Crime No.36 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners/A2 to A5 had arranged a marriage between A1 and a girl who is minor aged about 14 years. Subsequently, A1 married the minor girl. Hence the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that this is the first anticipatory bail filed by the petitioners. He further submitted that they are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and they are ready to co-operate for investigation. Hence, they pray to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17239 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 5 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that initially the accused were charged for the offences under Sections 9, 10 & 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act and subsequently altered into Sections 6(1) and 7(1) of POCSO Act. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration of the nature of the allegation against the petitioners and pending investigation, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed for the present. 06-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No MFA https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17239 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 5 To 1. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Kanchipuram, Kanchipuram District. 2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Chennai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17239 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 5 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. MFA CRL OP No. 17239 of 2026 06-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis