Sangeetha v. The State Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06.01.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Crl.O.P.No.25919 of 2021 Sangeetha
...Petitioner
Versus
State By,
...Respondent
The Inspector of Police Maruvathur Police Station Perambalur District (Crime No.462 of 2021) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his Arrest in Crime No.462 of 2021, pending on the file of Respondent Police.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sanakarasubu for Mr.C.Kathiravan For Respondent : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n), 506(ii) IPC r/w 5(I), 5(n), 6, of POCSO Act in Crime No. 462 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner's husband had sexually assaulted the victim girl. Further, the petitioner's husband again compelled the victim girl to have relationship with him, otherwise threatened to upload the photo of the victim girl on the social media. Hence, the complaint.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and she has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation is almost completed. However, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the investigation is almost completed, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days after lifting of lockdown or the commencement of the Court's normal functioning whichever is earlier, before the Mahila Court Sessions Judge, Perambalur, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:
(a) the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Court concerned 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 as and when required for interrogation and should not have any communication with the victim girl.
(c) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (d) the petitioner shall not abscond 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]; and;
(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.
-sd/- 06/01/2022 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 MAHILA COURT SESSIONS JUDGE, ERAMBALUR.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MARUVATHUR POLICE STATION, PERAMBALUR DISTRICT.
+1 CC to M/S.C.KATHIRAVAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.301 CRL OP.25919/2021 Date :06/01/2022 TA-12/01/2022