A.Paranthaman vs State

T.V.Thamilselvi, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 06.08.2022 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 363 of I.P.C. and Sec. 5(1), 6 of POCSO Act, 2012, in Crime No.05 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, pending trial in Spl.S.C.No. 61 of 2022 on the file of learned Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri, seeks bail.

The case of prosecution is that victim child is aged about 15 years and she is residing nearby village. While being so, the petitioner is talking with the complainant's daughter through phone and forced her to have sexual intercourse with him when she came to the petitioner's garden. Hence, the complaint.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this is the third petition seeking for bail and he is residing nearby village. He would submit that defacto complainant's daughter leave the house due to a problem with him and thereafter, she returns by herself. So, the allegations made against the petitioner is baseless and fabricated. He would submit that he is no way connected with the offence and he has not at all committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police. He would further submit that the investigation is almost completed and that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration for more than 135 days from 06.08.2022. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that by threatening the victim child, he had committed a penetrative sexual assault. He would submit that 164 statement was recorded, in which she has narrated the threaten made by him. He would submit that now the girl is also secured and trial is also commenced in Spl. S.C.No. 61 of 2022. He would submit that the investigation is almost completed and if he is released on bail, he would hamper the investigation and tamper the witnesses Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

Considering the facts and circumstances, and also the fact that the investigation is almost completed, 164 statement was recorded and now the trial is commenced in Spl.S.C.No. 61 of 2022 on the file learned Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each, in which one surety must be a blood surety, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri, 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 appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for the period of two months and he shall appear before the trial court for every hearing regularly without fail and he shall not have any communication with a victim girl or with her family, to that effect, he shall file an affidavit.

(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 petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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.