The High Court of Madras granted bail to V. Kangamuthu, accused of offences under POCSO Act and IPC, permitting his release on ₹10,000 surety bond with strict conditions following completion of investigation.
Petitioner released on bail on ₹10,000 surety bond with conditions to report to trial court, avoid absconding or tampering, and face re-arrest upon breach.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 02.03.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN
Crl.O.P.No.3179 of 2021
V.Kangamuthu ... Petitioner
Vs.
State Rep. by ... Respondent
The Inspector of Police,
Malliakarai Police Station,
Salem.
(Crime No.287 of 2020)
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime
No.287 of 2020 on the file of respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Panneer Selvan For Respondent : Mrs.M. Prabavathi, Addl. Public Prosecutor ORDER (The case has been heard through video conference)
The petitioner is a sole accused. The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.10.2020 for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366 of I.P.C. and Section 5 (1) r/w 6 of POCSO Act and Section 9 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, in Crime No.287 of 2020, seeks bail.
2 . The case of the prosecution is that the victim girl is a school going student, and the petitioner is a Physical Education Teacher in the same school. Both are said to be in love and thereafter, the petitioner has kidnapped the victim girl, married her and also sexually assaulted her. Hence, the criminal case has been registered against the petitioner, he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.10.2020. Now, this petition has been filed seeking for bail.
her. The petitioner has intended to marry her only after attaining majority. In the meantime, the complaint has been filed, he was arrested and he is in jail from 09.10.2020. He would submit that he is an innocent person and he is no way connected with the offence as alleged in the complaint. He would submit that his name not found in the F.I.R. and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.
(a) Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute 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 Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Salem, and on further conditions that:
(b) 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;
(c) the petitioner, on his release from prison, shall report before the trial court viz. Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Salem on all hearing dates without fail;
(d) the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature;
(e) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
(f) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
(g) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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];
(h) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.
TRUE COPY
Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.)
High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO
1 THE SPECIAL COURT FOR EXCLUSIVE TRIAL OF
CASES UNDER POCSO ACT, SALEM.
2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
MALLIAKARAI POLICE STATION,
SALEM.
3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
4 THE SUPERINTENDENT,
CENTRAL PRISON, SALEM.
CC to S/O.S.PANNEER SELVAN Advocate on payment of necessary
charges
CRL OP.3179/2021
Date :02/03/2021
TA-03/03/2021
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of offences under POCSO Act and IPC despite the completion of investigation.
Whether the petitioner should be released on bail after suffering incarceration since 09.10.2020.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
P.K. Shaji vs. State of KeralaExplained¶21
P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560] · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
V. Kangamuthu
State
V. Bharathidasan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
V. Bharathidasan
Parties & counsel
