Allowed

R.Thambi v. State Reb by

Madras HC16 Sept 2020CRL OP/13093/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court grants anticipatory bail to the petitioner apprehending arrest in a POCSO and IPC case. Bail is granted subject to conditions including reporting to police, executing a bond, and prohibiting tampering with evidence or absconding.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on anticipatory bail subject to conditions including bond execution, daily reporting, and prohibition on tampering or absconding.

R.Thambi Vs State Reb by — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 16.09.2020

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.13093 of 2020

¶6

R. Thambi, S/o. Rangasamy ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs. The State Rep by its The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Omalur, Salem. (Crime No.5 of 2020) ...Respondent

¶8

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.5 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr. G. Pavendhan For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor O R D E R

¶10

(The case has been heard through video conference)

¶11

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences publishable under Sections 323 of I.P.C. and Section 9(N) and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, in Crime No.5 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶12

The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant Renuka is that on 05.06.2020, the daughter of the defacto complainant was alone at her home, the petitioner had come to the house and asked her for water and when she brought water, the petitioner had pulled and slapped on her face. Hence, the complaint.

¶13

The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would submit that the petitioner and the defacto https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ complainant are close relatives and a dispute between both families,

¶14

a false complaint has been foisted against him. He would further submit that there is no allegation of sexual assault on the victim girl. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶15

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner had pulled the defacto complainant's daughter and also slapped on her face. He would submit that the 164 statement has been recorded from the victim girl. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶16

Taking into consideration the facts and submissions of the learned Counsel, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions;

¶17

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Sessions Judge of POCSO Act, Salem, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a separate 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

¶18

[a] the petitioner and 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.

¶19

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police every day at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks and thereafter every Monday at 10.30. a.m. until further orders.

¶20

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶21

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶22

[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].

¶23

[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶25

7.With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is ordered.

¶26

-sd/16/09/2020 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned

¶27

TRUE COPY
Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.)
High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO
1 THE SESSIONS JUDGE OFPOCSO ACT
SALEM
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION,
OMALUR,SALEM.
+1 CC to M/S.G.PAVENDHAN Advocate on payment of necessary
charges sr 6304
CRL OP.13093/2020
Date :16/09/2020
RD 23/09/2020

¶28

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

R.Thambi v. State Reb by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Thambi v. State Reb by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Radha Vs State Represented by

Magendiran Vs State Rep. by

K.Manikandan Vs State Rep.

V.Sobhana Vs the Inspector of Police

S.Aswin Vs State Rep by

Kannadhasan Vs the State Rep.by