CRL OP(MD)/23079/2026 of Ramesh Kumaran Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By In on 9 October 2026

ORDER

The present petition has been filed by the sole accused in Spl.SC.No.44 of 2022 dated 18.05.2026, on the file of the learned Special Sessions Court for the Exclusive Trial of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act cases, Kanyakumari District, seeking to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.104 of 2026, wherein the request of the petitioner to recall PW1 to PW8 has been rejected.

2. A perusal of the records reveal that the petitioner is charged with the offence under section 5(m), 6(l), 14(2) and 15(2) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 67B of Information Technology Act.

3. It could be seen from the charges that the petitioner is said to have videographed P.W.2 to P.W.4 who are the victim boys and circulated the same in the said locality. P.W.2 to P.W.4 are minor victims. The other witnesses who have already been examined are the parents and grandparents of the said victim who have lodged a complaint as against the petitioner therein for videographing the alleged incident and circulating the same in the locality. __________

( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 12:53:34 pm )

CRL OP(MD) No. 23079 of 2026

4. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, P.W.1 to P.W.5 were chief-examined on 15.12.2025 and P.W.6 to P.W.8 were chief-examined on 30.12.2025. On these two dates, the petitioner has not chosen to cross-examine them.

5. The present application is filed on 19.02.2026, seeking to recall P.W.1 to P.W.8 which has been dismissed under the impugned order.

6. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the Advocates were on a boycott protesting against the mandatory filing of certain cases through e-filing during relevant period and therefore, the learned counsel could not be presented and hence, the witnesses could not be cross-examined and there is no fault on his part.

7. He further submitted that series of charges are laid against the petitioner herein and therefore, unless the petitioner is permitted to cross- examine P.W.1 to P.W.8, he will be put to great hardship.

8. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the material records of the case. __________

( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 12:53:34 pm )

CRL OP(MD) No. 23079 of 2026

9. As far as the charges as against the petitioner are concerned, he is said to have videographed certain alleged immoral activities of P.W.2 to P.W.4, who are minor boys.

10. In such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to permit the petitioner to cross-examine P.W.2 to P.W.4. However, the other witnesses, namely P.W.1, P.W.5 to P.W.8, who are the relatives of the victim boys may be permitted to be recalled so that the petitioner could cross-examine them.

11. This Court is inclined to pass the following order:-

a) The order passed in Crl.M.P.No.104 of 2026 is set aside partly and the petitioner shall be permitted to recall P.W.1, P.W.5 to P.W.8 for the purpose of conducting cross-examination.

b) The petitioner shall pay batta to recall P.W.1, P.W.5 to P.W.8, within a period of three days, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. __________

( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 12:53:34 pm )

CRL OP(MD) No. 23079 of 2026

c) The petitioner shall cross-examine, the recalled witnesses on the day on which they appear and shall not seek any further adjournment.

11. With the said observations, the criminal original petition stands partly allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 09-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No rgm __________

( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 12:53:34 pm )

CRL OP(MD) No. 23079 of 2026 To The State of Tamilnadu, Rep., by the Inspector Of Police, AWPS-Marthandam, Kanyakumari District, Crime No.40/2021. __________

( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 12:53:34 pm )

CRL OP(MD) No. 23079 of 2026 R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J. rgm CRL OP(MD) No. 23079 of 2026 09-10-2026 __________

( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 12:53:34 pm )