Madras HC Grants Bail To Dismissed PT Teacher Accused Of Touching And Hugging Schoolgirls After Final Report Filed

In brief

The question

Whether the appellant’s bail application should be allowed after completion of the investigation and filing of the final report.

The court held

The Court allowed the appeal and set aside the Sessions Court’s order dated 25 August 2026.

It also directed

It ordered the appellant’s release on bail on specified conditions, including execution of a bond of ₹25,000 with two sureties, regular court attendance, non-interference with witnesses, and compliance with the other conditions imposed.

It further directed the High Court Legal Services Committee to pay the scheduled fees to the Legal Aid Counsel appointed for the third respondent.

01Facts

The appellant, a physical-training teacher at a Government School, was accused of inappropriately touching, hugging and kissing some minor girls, and making lewd comments to others.

p. 2

The case was registered under Sections 10, 11(1), 12 and 9(f) of the POCSO Act read with Section 3(1)(w)(i) of the SC/ST Act.

p. 2

The Sessions Court dismissed his bail application, principally because the investigation was incomplete and the victims’ statements under Section 183 of the BNSS had not been recorded before a Magistrate.

p. 4

The appellant appealed under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act.

p. 1

By the time of the appeal, the final report had been filed and the appellant had been dismissed from his post.

p. 2 · p. 4

02Issues

i.Whether the appellant’s bail application should be allowed after completion of the investigation and filing of the final report.

p. 4 · p. 5

ii.Whether bail should be refused on the stated risk of witness tampering, notwithstanding conditions intended to protect the complainant and prevent interference with witnesses.

p. 3 · p. 5 · p. 6

03Law Applied

The appeal was brought under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act, which provides the relevant appellate route for challenging the bail order.

p. 1

The alleged offences were under Sections 10, 11(1), 12 and 9(f) of the POCSO Act read with Section 3(1)(w)(i) of the SC/ST Act.

p. 2

The Court relied on P.K. Shaji v. State of Kerala, (2005) AIR SCW 5560, for the proposition that the trial court may take appropriate action in accordance with law if bail conditions are breached.

p. 6

The judgment does not set out a broader test for deciding bail in these circumstances.

Provisions in the judgment · 6 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Section 3

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 10 Section 11 Section 12 Section 9

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 183

04Reasoning

The Sessions Court’s principal reasons for refusing bail—ongoing investigation and the absence of the victims’ statements under Section 183 of the BNSS—no longer applied because the investigation had concluded and the final report had been filed.

p. 4

The Court also noted that the appellant had been dismissed from the school and considered the period of his incarceration.

p. 4

Although the third respondent’s counsel raised the risk of witness tampering, the Court granted bail subject to conditions requiring the appellant to attend court, refrain from similar offences, and not abscond or tamper with evidence or witnesses; it also directed police to ensure the complainant’s safety.

p. 3 · p. 5 · p. 6