Ajith v. State Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 14.08.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No. 12236 of 2020 Ajith ... Petitioner Vs.
The State represented by, ... Respondent The Inspector of Police, Omerabad Police Station, Vellore District.
Crime No.822 of 2020.
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime.No.822/2020 pending on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr.E.Kannadasan For Respondent : Mr.T.Shunmugarajeswaran Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 17.07.2020 for the offences punishable under Section 366 (A), 376(2)(n) of I.P.C. and section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act 2012 in Crime No. 822 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2 The case of the prosecution as per the de-facto complainant one Ponnusamy is that his minor daughter was found missing. During the course of the investigation, it came to light that the petitioner had kidnapped the minor girl and married her and committed penetrative sexual assault. Hence, the complaint. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit the petitioner and the daughter of the defacto complainant were neighbours and that they were in love with each other. Since, they belongs to two different communities, it was objected by the
parents of the victim and on 24.06.2020 against her wish, the parents of the victim arranged her marriage with another person from her community. Due to which, the victim came out from the house and informed the petitioner that if he does not take her with him, she would commit suicide and that the petitioner was constrained to take her along. After coming to know that the case was registered, the petitioner along with victim girl surrendered before the respondent police. He would submit that the petitioner is willing to marry the victim girl. Hence, he seeks for grant of bail to the petitioner. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner had kidnapped the minor daughter of the defacto complainant and married her. He would submit that age of the victim girl is 17 years and that her statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., and she has not supported the case of the prosecution. However, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.
Heard both sides and perused the records and the 164 Cr.P.C. Statement recorded from the victim girl
6. Taking into consideration of the facts and submission of the learned counsels and the fact that the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. does not support the case of the prosecution, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:- (a) Accordingly, the Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing his own bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), before the Superintendent of the concerned prison, in which the Petitioner has been confined and thereafter on his release;
(b) the petitioner shall execute two sureties for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Thiruppathur, within 15 days from the date of lifting of the lock down and the commencement of the Court's normal functioning, failing which the bail granted by this Court shall stand dismissed automatically;
(c) the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar Card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity;
(d) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.
(e) the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature;
(f) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
(g) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
(h) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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];
(i) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.
6.With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is ordered.
-sd/- 14/08/2020 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 JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, THIRUPPATHUR.
2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE VELLORE. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, OMERABAD POLICE STATION, VELLORE DISTRICT 5 THE OFFICER INCHARGE SUB JAIL, AMBUR 6 THE OFFICER INCHARGE SUB JAIL, GUDIYATHAM.
CC to M/S E.KANNADASAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.12236/2020 Date :14/08/2020 TA-08/09/2020