R.Loganathan vs The State Represented By Inspector Of Police

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 15.06.2026 for the alleged offences under Section 3(d) read with Section 4(2) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 in Crime No.14 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed the penetrative sexual assault on the victim boy, aged 8 years. Hence, the complaint.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the victim is aged 8 years and the accused is aged 35 years. He also produced the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS. He further submitted that the investigation completed and the charge sheet has been filed and was taken on file in Spl.S.C. No.171 of 2026 and that the next date of hearing is on 17.09.2026 for furnishing of copies. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the period of incarceration and the nature of the allegation and the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS and the fact that the investigation completed and the charge sheet has also been filed and was taken on file in Spl.S.C. No.171 of 2026, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail subject to 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 each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned II Additional District Judge, Mahila Court (FTC), Tiruppur, 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 Trial Court 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];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code. To