R.Sathya Prakash v. State Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Twenty Fifth day of March Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V. THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.6046 of 2022 R.SATHYA PRAKASH [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, W-27, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, VADAPALANI, CHENNAI.
CR.NO. 14 OF 2021.
For Petitioner : M/S.C.C.CHELLAPPAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.L.BASKARAN,Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 06.07.2021 for the offences under Section 8 of POCSO Act r/w 294(b), 506(i) of IPC later altered into Section 294(b), 506(i) IPC and Section 6 r/w 5(l), 10 r/w 9(l), 11(v) r/w 12 of POCSO act, in crime No.14 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the victim girl is aged about 17 years and she used to talk with petitioner, who is a married man, through Instagram. While so, the petitioner gave a false promise by saying that he had get chance in the film industry and he enticed the victim girl and compel her to love him. Thereafter, he took her to his house and sexually harassed her. Further, the victim's parents took her to their native, again, he followed her. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner was no way connected in this case and he was falsely implicated in this case and he was suffering incarceration for more than seven months from 06.07.2021. Hence, the learned counsel prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) raised an objection stating that the petitioner who is about 40 years and had got married two women having two children, cheated the victim girl under the guise of getting chance for her in film industry and sexually harassed and threatened her. He further submits that the statement of the victim girl under Section 164 of Cr.P.C has been recorded. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail.
5. A perusal of the Statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C, reveals that the victim has stated that petitioner has sexually harassed continuously and threatened her. Further, he had already married one women and defaulted, then, he married another women and having children.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the submissions made by both the learned counsels and also considering the fact that there is serious allegations levelled against the petitioner, this Court is of the view that if the petitioner released on bail, he may tamper the evidence. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Further, this Court directs the trial Court to dispose the case within four months from the date of a copy of this Order. -sd/- 25/03/2022 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO 1 THE SPECIAL COURT FOR EXCLUSIVE TRIAL OF CASES UNDER POCSO ACT, CHENNAI 2 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON-II, PUZHAL, CHENNAI 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, W-27, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, VADAPALANI, CHENNAI.
4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
CC to M/S.C.C.CHELLAPPAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.6046/2022 Date :25/03/2022 RVR 31/03/2022