Arivalagan v. The State Rep By Its,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.11.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Arivazhagan ...
Appellant /Accused Vs.
1. The State rep.by The Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore, Cuddalore District.
2. The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, Chidambaram, Cuddalore District.
3.Uma ... Respondents / Complainant Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to set aside the order in Crl.M.P.No.890 of 2024 passed by the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of cases under POCSO Act, Cuddalore and enlarge the petitioner on bail, pending trial in Spl.SC No.35 of 2024.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Soundar Vijay Arul Ram For Respondents-1 & 2 : Dr.C.E.Pratap Page No.1 of 6
Government Advocate(crl.side) For R-3 : Mr.E.V.Chandrasekaran Legal aid counsel
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed challenging the dismissal of the petitioner's application for bail by the trial court.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner and the victim belong to the same village and that the petitioner had offered food to the victim and thereafter took her to a haunted house, gagged her mouth and committed penetrative sexual assault.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case; and that he is in custody from 22.12.2022; and that the respondents have not filed their final report; and that the victim-PW1 was examined in chief and cross examined by the learned counsel for the appellant; and in view of the continuous incarceration, the appellant is unable to defend himself in the trial effectively and therefore the order dismissing the bail petition may be set aside and the Page No.2 of 6
appellant may be released on bail.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the third respondent/defacto complainant would submit that considering the fact that the appellant is likely to tamper the witness if he is released on bail, this appeal may be dismissed.
5. The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) would submit that the respondents, after investigation had filed the final report and the case is now posted for cross examination of the parents of the victim and the victim has already been examined.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as third respondent and the learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the respondents 1 & 2.
Page No.3 of 6
7. Considering the fact that the final report had been filed and it is for the prosecution to establish the allegations against the appellant in the trial, the period of incarceration; and the fact that the victim has already been examined and the appellant has to defend himself in the trial, this court is inclined to grant bail to the appellant.
8. Accordingly, the appellant is ordered to be released on bail subject to the following conditions :
(i) The appellant shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Special Court for Exclusive Trial of cases under POCSO Act, Cuddalore ;
(ii) the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned Judge may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;
(iii) the appellant/accused shall appear before the trial court on all hearing dates without fail.
(iv)the appellant shall not commit any offences of similar nature;
(v)the appellant shall not abscond either during Page No.4 of 6
investigation or trial;
(vi)the appellant shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
(vii)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Trial Judge is entitled to take appropriate action against the appellant in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the appellant 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];
(viii)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.
9. In view of the above, the impugned order in Crl.M.P.No.890 of 2024 passed by the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of cases under POCSO Act, Cuddalore in Spl.SC No.35 of 2024 is set aside and the Criminal Appeal is allowed.
29.11.2024 Index : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order rgr Note : Issue order copy by 03.12.2024 Upload the order copy forthwith.
Page No.5 of 6
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
rgr To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore, Cuddalore District.
2. The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, Chidambaram, Cuddalore District.
3.The Special Judge for Exclusive Trial of cases under POCSO Act, Cuddalore.
4.The Superintendent of Police, Central Prison, Cuddalore.
5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
29.11.2024 Page No.6 of 6