MRT Vijayakumar vs The State Represented By Its, The Inspector Of Police

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 13.08.2026 for the alleged offences under Section 5(l), 5(m) and 5(n), read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 in Crime No.23 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the proseuction is that the petitioner allegedly sexually abused the minor daughter of the de-facto complainant on multiple occasions, prevented the de-facto complainant from approaching the police and that the present FIR was registered on her complaint dated 12.08.2026.

The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that there is a matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and his wife, and that the petitioner had issued a legal notice seeking divorce. He contened that the present complaint was lodged by the petitioner’s wife in retaliation and the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the Petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and submited that the investigation is still pending.

The statement of the victim child recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS has been perused, wherein she has stated that her father touched and massaged her in inappropriate places. The statement of the victim’s brother, aged about 12 years, has also been persused, wherein he has stated that the victim child was sexually abused by their father.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, the statements of the victim child and her brother, and the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following 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, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases Under POCSO Act, Chennai, and on further conditions that: [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

Note: