Dharun v. State Rep By, Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 15.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Dharun

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs.

State rep by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Mettur, Salem District.

(Crime No.4 of 2025) ...

Respondent PRAYER: This criminal original petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.4 of 2025 dated 18.03.2025 pending on the file of the respondent. For Petitioner :

Mr.N.Krishnamoorthy For Respondent :

Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.03.2025, seeking bail Page No.1 of 5

in Crime No.04 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 9(m) r/w 10 of POCSO Act, 2012.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, aged about 20 years and the victim girl, aged about 6 years are neighbours; that on the date of occurrence, the petitioner had inappropriately touched the private part of the victim girl and thus, committed the aforesaid offences. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the allegations against the petitioner are false; that the petitioner is sought to be implicated as an accused due to previous enmity between the petitioner's family and victim girl's family and that in any case, considering the period of incarceration, he may be released on bail. 4.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reiterated the prosecution case and opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner and submitted a copy of Section 183 BNSS statement of the victim girl. Page No.2 of 5

5. The perusal of Section 183 BNSS statement would suggest that the petitioner had inappropriately touched the private part of the victim girl. Considering the nature of allegations against the petitioner and the period of incarceration, this Court is of the view that further custody of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions: 6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge, Principal POCSO Court, Salem and on further 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 respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; Page No.3 of 5

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness 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];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

15.04.2025 rkp Copy to:

1. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Mettur, Salem District.

2.The Sessions Judge, Principal POCSO Court, Salem.

3. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Salem.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

Page No.4 of 5

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

rkp 15.04.2025 Page No.5 of 5