Balamurugan vs State

T.V.Thamilselvi, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 01.11.2022 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 450 and 506(ii) of IPC and Sections 5(I), 5(m), 5(n) and 6 of POCSO Act 2012 @ Sections 342, 450, 506(ii) of IPC r/w Section 4 of TNWH Act r/w 5(I), 5(n), 5(i), 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 in Crime No.25 of 2022 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the accused trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim girl, who is aged about 12 years. Hence the case.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are neighbours and due to previous enmity, a false complaint has been given against him. He further submitted that he has nothing to do with the alleged offence. He further submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 01.11.2022, hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the accused trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim girl, who is aged about 12 years. He further submitted that the statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C has been recorded from the victim girl and the final report has been filed in Spl.S.C.No.3 of 2023. However, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent and perused the materials available on record including the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C recorded from the victim girl.

6.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and also of the fact that the statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C has been recorded from the victim girl and the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties (out of which, one should be the blood surety, who should produce document to show his/her means), each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive trial of cases under POCSO Act, Villupuram 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] At the time of furnishing the sureties, the petitioner shall also file an affidavit of undertaking stating that he will not communicate with the victim girl in future.

[c] the petitioner shall stay at Tiruvannamalai and report before the Inspector of Police, Vetavalam Police Station, daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three months;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[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 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];

[g] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.