Raman v. The State Rep By Its,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 27.01.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Raman ... Petitioner Vs.

The State by, The Inspector of Police, All woman Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

(Crime No.11/2021).

... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with the Crime No.11 of 2021 pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.S. Thirugnanam For Respondent : Mr.S.Vinoth KUmar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/5

O R D E R

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 31.08.2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 354. 363, 366,376 A,B of IPC and Sections 5(m), 6, 9(m), 10 of POCSO Act in Crime No.11 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner committed penetrative sexual assault on the minor victim girl, due to which she was suffering physically and mentally. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he is in custody from 31.08.2021 and hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4.The Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner committed penetrative sexual assault on the minor victim girl, due to which she was suffering physically and 2/5

mentally. He would also submit that the charge sheet has been filed and nearly 10 witnesses have been examined. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent and perused the materials available on record including the 164 Cr.P.C statement recorded from the victim girl.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner and charge sheet has been filed and nearly 10 witnesses have been examined, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- ( Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties ( out of which one must be blood related surety), each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, exclusive trial of POCSO Act Cases at Thiruvannamalai and on further 3/5

conditions that:

(a)the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b) the petitioner shall report before the trial Court in all the working days.

(c) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (d)the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(e)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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 5560]; and;

(f)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC. 27.01.2023 smn 4/5

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

smn To 1.The Special Judge, exclusive trial of POCSO Act Cases at Thiruvannamalai 2.The Inspector of Police, All woman Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

3.The Central Prison, vellore 4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

27.01.2023 5/5