Manikandan.R v. State Rep By
CRL OP NO. 1033 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21-01-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP NO. 1033 of 2025 Manikandan.R S/O.Raja, No.4/6958,M.K.Chavadi, Kalaivanar Extension, Pattanur, Vanur Taluk Viluppuram Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep By Inspector of Police, Thazham bur Police Station, Chengalpet District. Cr.No.255 of 2022.
Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s): M/s. S. Kalaimani For Respondent(s): Mr. S.Santhosh, Government Advocate (Criminal Side).
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 366-A, 376(2)(n). 376(AB), r/w Sections 4, 5(1), 5(g), 5(n), 5(i)(ii), 6, 17 of Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, (POCSO) 2012, in Crime No.255 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with the other accused, allegedly misused the minor girl, involving her in prostitution and the
drug trade and committed penetrative sexual assault on her. Hence the complaint.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the victim were acquainted, having had a love affair between them, and that had consensual sexual. The petitioner is an innocent person, who has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner has no way in connection with the offence as alleged by the prosecution. Therefore, he prays for the grant of anticipatory bail.
4. In contrast, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner stating that this is a case where the petitioner, along with another accused had exploited a 16 year old minor girl for drug sales and prostitution. He also submitted that the petitioner, along with the other accused, took the minor girl to Andhra Pradesh and other places, where they forcibly committed penetrative sexual assault. Furthermore, he submitted that the victim has also given a statement under Section 183 of BNSS, wherein, she has made specific overtact against the petitioner, and that it is not a case of love affair. The petitioner is aged about 36
years and the victim is aged about 16 years. Additionally he submitted that the petitioner and the other accused are absconding and the respondent Police taking steps to arrest them. Therefore, if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, there is a possibility that he will commit a similar offence in the future.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl Side) for the respondent and perused the entire materials available on record, including the statement of victim under Section 183 of BNSS.
6. This is the first application for anticipatory bail. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and considering the offence charged against the petitioner, and also taking note of the fact that the petitioner and the other accused have committed a grave offence of exploiting a minor, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 21-01-2025 klt To
1. State Rep By
Inspector of Police,Thazham bur Police Station, Chengalpet District. Cr.No.255 of 2022.
A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
klt CRL OP NO. 1033 of 2025 21-01-2025