Karthik Ragav vs State

A.D.Jagadish Chandira, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 15.02.2022, for the offences punishable under Sections 5(l) r/w 6 & 12 of POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 66(E) IT Act and under Section 506(i) of IPC in Crime No.15 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant namely Sangeetha is that her husband is working at Australia and she is living with her daughter aged about 16 years. The petitioner is well known to the family of the defacto complainant and during covid pandemic, the petitioner and daughter of the defacto complainant chatted through social media and later developed closeness. While being so, the defacto complainant to secure her daughter from the petitioner, had shifted her residence to coimbatore. Thereafter, the petitioner had gone to Coimbatore, abducted the daughter of the defacto complainant and taken her in a car and committed penetrative sexual assault and also threatened her that he would upload the photos in porn websites and in social media. Hence, the complaint.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a well known person to the family of the defacto complainant. During Covid Lockdown, the petitioner and defacto complainant's daughter chatted through social media and later it was developed into love affair. When the same came to the knowledge of the defacto complainant, she attempted to severe the relationship and took her daughter to Coimbatore. Later on the invitation of the defacto complainant's daughter the petitioner went to Coimbatore and they met in a Mall. The defacto complainant got antagonised and she lodged a false complainant against the petitioner and the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody from 15.02.2022. He would submit that the major part of the investigation is over, the medical examination of the petitioner has been completed and a statement has also been recorded from the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

Learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that the petitioner and the minor victim girl chatted through social media and later it developed into love affair. The petitioner abducted the victim girl, committed penetrative sexual assault and threatened her by saying that he will upload her private photos in porn websites and in social medias. He also submitted that mobile phone and all the electronic gadgets of the petitioner had been seized from the pettioner. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5.In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is also ready to file an affidavit of undertaking before the learned Magistrate that he will not interfere with the life of the defacto complainant or her daughter and send any messages herein after. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) and perused the materials available on record including the Statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner also agreed to file an undertaking affidavit that he will not interfere with the life of the victim girl further and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner from 15.02.2022, 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 a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two sureties (out of which one surety shall be the father or mother of the petitioner), each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under the POCSO Act, at Chennai, 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 report before respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall filed an undertaking affidavit that he will not interfere with the life of the defacto complainant or her daughter in futureand send any messages herein after. .

[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.