Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/12056/2025allowed

Jeevanantham v. The State Of Tamilnadu

2025-07-17Honourable Mr Justice P.Vadamalai6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 17.07.2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI Jeevanantham (aged 61/2025) (A2) S/o.Nalluthevar ... Petitioner/Accused No.2 Vs The State Rep by The Inspector of Police, Vadipatti Police Station, Madurai District.

(Crime No.357 of 2024) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.M.Vivek kumar For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.357 of 2024 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 11.12.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 84 BNS & 5(l),5(k), 5(m) 5(g) 1/6

r/w 6 of POCSO Act @ 84 BNS & 5(l) 5(k) 5(m) 5(g) r/w 6 of POCSO Act r/w 3(1) (w)(ii) SC/ST POA Act, in Crime No.357 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The prosecution's case is that on 10.12.2024 at 05:30 p.m., the second daughter and son of the de facto complainant were playing on the roof of the house, and the first daughter was studying inside the house. Thereafter, the second daughter was missing in the house. Further, the defacto complainant has found that the petitioner along with A1 had kidnapped the second daughter of the defacto complainant and sexually harassed her. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is the friend of A1, he was falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions which may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court. Hence, he seeks bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that the 2/6

petitioner had misbehaved with the victim girl and sexually harassed her. He further submitted that the statement under section 164 of Cr.P.C., has been recorded from the mother of the victim girl, victim girl and brother of the victim girl. He further submitted that the investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has also been filed through E-filing. He further submitted that there is one previous case pending against the petitioner in Crime No.44 of 2021 before the Dindigul Police Station. Hence, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has also been filed through E-filing and taking into consideration of the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing 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 Sessions Judge (Special Court for POCSO Act Cases), Madurai, and on further conditions that :- [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb 3/6

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 furnish his residential address and mobile number to the learned Sessions Judge (Special Court for POCSO Act Cases), Madurai.

(c)If the petitioner changes his residential address, he shall report the same to the learned Sessions Judge (Special Court for POCSO Act Cases), Madurai.

[d] the petitioner shall stay at Dindigul and report before the Inspector of Police, Dindigul Town Police Station, daily at 10.00 a.m., and 05.00 p.m., until further orders.

[e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

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

[g] 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 4/6

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]. [h] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

sd/- 17/07/2025 / TRUE COPY / 17/07/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

MSRM TO 1 THE LEARNED SESSIONS JUDGE (SPECIAL COURT FOR POCSO ACT CASES), MADURAI.

2 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, MADURAI.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VADIPATTI POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT.

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DINDIGUL TOWN POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL.

5/6

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.12056 of 2025 Date :17/07/2025 NM/17.07.2025/ 6P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 6/6