Sundarraj vs State

T.V.Thamilselvi, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.02.2024 for the alleged offences under Sections 11(iv), 12 of POCSO Act, 2012 and Sec.506(i) of I.P.C. in Crime No.06 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of prosecution is that the defacto complainant had formerly resided along with her husband and three children as a tenant at the petitioner's house and subsequently, they have shifted their residence to Choolaimedu. But, the petitioner was keeping on following her daughter, aged about 16 years while she was proceeding to her school and tuition and said to have forced her to love him and marry him for the past two years. As the victim girl informed the same to her parents, they have warned him not to behave like this and only due to the sake of child's future, they did not come forward to lodge a complaint, but again on 05.02.2024, when the petitioner said to have followed defacto complainant's daughter and threatened her to love him and marry him or else, he will kill her. Hence, the complaint was registered against the petitioner.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that based on a false confession statement and by coercion, he was implicated as accused in this case. He would also submit that the allegations made against the petitioner is baseless and fabricated and he is no way connected with the offence and he has not at all committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police. He would further submit that the investigation is almost completed and that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration for more than 55 days from 05.02.2024. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that he is arrayed as sole accused and the investigation is completed as on date. He would also submit that the petitioner is aged about 52 years and gave a proposal to a victim girl, who is a minor and also threatened her to marry him. Hence, the parents of minor victim girl lodged a complaint. He would submit that 164 statement was recorded, in which, she stated that the petitioner attempted to misbehave with her. He would submit that the investigation is almost completed and if he is released on bail, he would hamper the investigation and tamper the witnesses Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

By way of reply, the learned counsel for petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the erstwhile landlord of defacto complainant and in fact, they are known each other and out of love and affection, he wanted to marry defacto complainant's daughter.

Considering the facts and circumstances and as per the allegation, the petitioner gave a proposal with a minor girl to marry him, so on considering the fact that he had made only a proposal to marry victim girl and on perusal of 164 statement recorded from a victim girl was produced before this court, wherein, she had stated that he gave only a love proposal and also the fact that the investigation is almost completed and also on considering the period of incarceration for more than 55 days from 05.02.2024, 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 bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each, in which one surety must be a blood surety, 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 surety bond and the learned Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar Card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b) the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police on every Monday, Wednesday and Sunday at 10.30 a.m. for the period of three months;

(c) the petitioner shall not have any communication with a victim girl and her family members and he shall appear before the trial court for every hearing regularly without fail.

(d) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(e) the petitioner shall not abscond 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]; and;

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