Somasundaram v. State Represented 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. 12265 of 2020 Somasundaram ... Petitioner Vs.

The State represented by, ... Respondent The Inspector of Police, Fort Police Station, Chennai.

(Crime No.94 of 2020) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.94 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Dilip Kumar 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 29.05.2020 in Crime No.94 of 2020 originally registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C. and later altered to section 4 of POSCO Act in Crime No. 94 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2 The case of the prosecution as per the de-facto complainant one Sunder is that his minor daughter was found missing from his house on 27.05.2020 following which, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent police and a case was registered under the caption "girl missing". During the course of the investigation, it came to light that the petitioner had kidnapped the minor girl and committed penetrative sexual assault on her. Hence, the complaint.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit the petitioner and the daughter of the defacto complainant were loving each other. He would further submit that the parents of the victim arranged the marriage with some other person against her wish. Since, the victim girl was in the verge of attaining the majority, she had eloped with the petitioner and 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 in custody for more than 70 days. 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 committed penetrative sexual assault on her. He would submit that age of the victim girl is 16 years and that her statement was recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. and medical examination of the petitioner and the victim girl is also completed. However, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5.

Heard both sides and perused the records and 164 Cr.P.C Statement recorded from the victim girl.

Taking into consideration of the facts and submission of the learned counsels and considering the period of incarceration, 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 VII Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai 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 VII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, CHENNAI.

2 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, FORT POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

5 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL.

CC to M/S.S.DILIP KUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.12265/2020 Date :14/08/2020 TA-08/09/2020