Prathap vs State

T.V.Thamilselvi, J

The petitioner who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 24.09.2022 for the offences under Sections 174(1) Cr.P.C., subsequently it was altered to Sec. 450, 342, 305 of I.P.C. r/w Sec.5(1) 6 of POCSO Act and Sec.4B(2) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act in Cr.No.357 of 2022, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and victim Sangeetha is aged about 14 years, fall in love and they used to visit to both of their house. His father restrained her to visit his house. However, in absence of petitioner, she developed her intimacy with another accused. When this came to the knowledge of petitioner, there was a wordy quarrel and on 22.09.2022, she committed suicide by hanging and died. Hence, the complaint.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has not at all committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police and the respondent police registered a false case against him for statistical purpose. He would further submit that the investigation is almost completed and that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration for more than 71 days from 24.09.2022. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) raised objection stating that the petitioner used to contact the deceased victim Sangeetha through phone and harassed her and on the date of alleged occurrence, he went to deceased house and thereafter, the offence was happened. Based upon the complaint given by father of deceased, F.I.R. was lodged against this petitioner and his friend Bhuvanesh.

On considering the fact that the petitioner was arrested for the aforesaid offence and statement was recorded from the deceased, investigation almost completed 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 a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tindivanam, 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 the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for the period of three months.

(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 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]; and;

(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.