Ranjith @ Ranjith Kumar v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 12/03/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Ranjith @ Ranjith Kumar ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs The Inspector of Police, Nangavaram Police Station, Karur District.

Crime No.20 of 2025 ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner :

Mr.P.Pandia Rajan, Advocate For Respondent :

Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No.20 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Sole Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 01.02.2025 for the offences punishable under sections 7 and 8 of the Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 in Crime No.20 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

1/5

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the neighbour of the defacto complainant. The allegation against the petitioner is that he sexually harassed the younger daughter of the defacto complainant. On 30.01.2025, at about 07.15 a.m., when the defacto complainant's younger daughter went to attend the nature call, at that time, the petitioner sexually assaulted the younger daughter of the defacto complainant. Due to which, her younger daughter tried to commit suicide by taking pesticide from the house. Thereafter, she took treatment as an inpatient in a private hospital. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and a false case has been foisted against him. He would further submit that if the petitioner is released on bail, he will not abscond. He would further submit that the petitioner is in custody from 01.02.2025 and he is also ready to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. He further submits that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner may be released on bail.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner is the sole accused in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner sexually assaulted the victim, causing her to become depressed and attempt suicide by consuming pesticide from the house. He would further submit that the statement 2/5

under Section 183 of BNSS has not yet been recorded from the victim girl and no previous case is pending against the petitioner. He would further submit that if bail is granted to the petitioner, he may cause threat to the defacto complainant and the victim girl. Hence he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made on either side, considering the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, considering the fact that no previous case is pending against the petitioner and also taking into consideration the period of incarceration underwent by the petitioner, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to 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 learned Mahila Judge, Karur and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.00 A.M. until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. 3/5

[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Mahila Judge / 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 Mahila Judge /Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

sd/- 12/03/2025 / TRUE COPY / 12/03/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TSG TO 1 THE JUDGE, MAHILA COURT, KARUR.

2 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, SUB JAIL, KULITHALAI, KARUR DISTRICT. 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NANGAVARAM POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT.

4/5

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1 CC to M/s.P.PANDIARAJAN, Advocate ( SR-2672[I] dated 12/03/2025 )

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.4554 of 2025 Date :12/03/2025 RS/IT/SAR-(12.03.2025) 5P 6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 5/5