Ruban N. vs The State Rep by The Inspector of Police

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody for the alleged offences punishable under Section 9(m) read with 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, in Crime No. 22 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner sexually assaulted the minor victim boy by kissing him and pressing his chest. Based on the complaint lodged by the mother of the victim child, the case was registered. Hence, the case.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to a family dispute or prior animosity. He further submitted that the investigation is substantially completed, the petitioner has been in continuous judicial custody for a considerable period, and his continued incarceration is not necessary for further interrogation. Hence, he prayed for the grant of bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner. He submitted that the offence involved is highly serious in nature as it involves the aggravated sexual assault of a minor boy. He argued that if released on bail at this juncture, there is a strong apprehension that the petitioner might intimidate the victim child or his family members and tamper with the prosecution witnesses. Hence, he prayed for the dismissal of the bail petition.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, and taking note of the period of incarceration already undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

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 Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, High Court Building, Chennai, and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix his 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 his 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];

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