Baskaran Alias Bagudu Baskaran v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17.03.2026

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Baskaran @ Bagudu Baskaran ... Appellant Vs.

1.

The State represented by, The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ranipet Sub-Division, Ranipet District.

The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Ranipet All Women Police Station, Ranipet District.

(Crime No.7 of 2022) Amutha ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr.C.Deepak Kumar For R1 & R2 : Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For R3 : Mr.M.Mohamed Saifulla Legal Aid Counsel PRAYER: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 as amended by Act 1/2016, to call for the records pertaining to the bail 1/6

dismissal order passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ranipet District in Crl.M.P.No.23 of 2026 dated 12.01.2026 and set aside the same and subsequently enlarge the appellant on bail. JUDGMEMT The present Criminal Appeal has been filed against the order dated 12.01.2026 passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ranipet District, in Crl.M.P.No.23 of 2026, dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner seeking bail in Crime No.7 of 2022. The brief facts of the facts are that the appellant/A1, who is a neighbour of the de facto complainant, in collusion with his wife/A2, on 03.10.2022, is alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 323, 342, 449, 354A(1)(ii) 345B, 376(2)(n), 506(ii) and 109 IPC, Sections 5(h), 5(l), 5(u), 6 r/w 8, 15(1) and 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 66E of the Information Technology Act, 2000, on the de facto complainant and her minor daughter.

2/6

Based on the complaint given by the de facto complainant, a case in Crime No.7 of 2022 came to be registered and after completion of investigation, the case was taken on the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Vellore in Spl.S.C.No.38 of 2023. Subsequently, the case was transferred to the file of the Principal District and Sessions Court, Ranipet, in Spl.S.C.No.8 of 2024. So far, 16 out of 25 witnesses have been examined.

4.

Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record, including the counter filed by the first respondent police.

5.

Earlier, the appellant/accused had approached this Court by filing an appeal in Crl.A.No.708 of 2023 against the dismissal of the bail petition in Crl.M.P.No.502 of 2023 by the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Vellore, vide order dated 13.04.2023. This Court, considering the depositions of the witnesses and finding that the charges against the appellant/accused appear to be serious in nature, dismissed the appeal vide judgment dated 10.08.2023, holding that there was no reason to enlarge the appellant on bail. 3/6

6.

Thereafter, the appellant/accused once again filed a petition seeking bail before the Court below in Crl.M.P.No.1176 of 2024, which was dismissed on 06.08.2024. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred an appeal before this Court in Crl.A.No.1252 of 2024 and the same came to be dismissed on 29.10.2024.

7.

Now, in the third round, after the case has been transferred to the file of the Principal District and Sessions Court, Ranipet, the appellant filed a petition in Crl.M.P.No.23 of 2026 seeking bail. The trial Court, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the serious nature of the offences as well as the antecedents of the appellant/accused that he has ten previous cases, dismissed the same vide order dated 12.01.2026. Challenging the same, the present appeal has been filed.

8.

From the undisputed trajectory this case has taken thus far which has been discussed from paragraphs 5 to 7, supra, it unfurls that the earlier appeals filed by the appellant/accused were dismissed on merits and since then, no change in circumstances has been made out. Therefore, this appeal is liable to be dismissed.

4/6

9.

Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal stands dismissed. However, taking note of the fact that the case is of the year 2022 and offences under the POCSO Act and SC/ST (PoA) Act, which are special enactments, are involved, this Court directs the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ranipet District, to complete the trial in Spl.S.C.No.8 of 2024, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

17.03.2026 ham To 1.

The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ranipet District.

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ranipet Sub-Division, Ranipet District.

The Inspector of Police, Ranipet All Women Police Station, Ranipet District.

4.

The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

5/6

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.

ham 17.03.2026 6/6