Allowed

Prabu v. the Station Housing Officer

Madras HC4 Jul 2022CRL OP/15313/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Madras granted bail to four petitioners accused under the POCSO Act. Relying on the completion of investigation and the risk of evidence tampering due to proximate residence, the court released them on bond with specific conditions regarding reporting and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners ordered to be released on bail subject to execution of bond for Rs.25,000, producing sureties, and reporting to the Investigating Officer;

Prabu Vs the Station Housing Officer — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 04.07.2022

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.15313 of 2022

¶6

Prabu

¶7

Vengadesan

¶8

Babu

¶9

Elumalai

¶10

The State of Tamilnadu Through the Station Housing Officer, All Women Police Station (Cr.No.2 of 2022) Gingee, Villupuram District.

¶11

.. Respondent

¶12

Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime No.2 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police.

¶13

For Petitioners : M/s.M.Devaraj For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

These petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.4, 5, 6 & 8, who were arrested and remanded into judicial custody on 10.01.2022 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 5(1), 5(j)(ii), 6, 16, 17, 19, 21(1) of POCSO Act in Crime No.2 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

¶16

The victim girl aged about 15 years was found five months pregnant and on enquiry, she had disclosed the names of few adult male members of her village. These petitioners are some among them. When the petitioners moved bail before this Court, taking note of the fact that final report not yet filed and the petitioners are hailing from the same village to avoid distractions of evidence, the petition was dismissed.

¶17

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

¶18

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the investigation is completed and final report has been filed and taken on file in Special S.C.No.115 of 2022 by the POCSO Court, Villupuram and the case is posted for framing charges.

¶19

In the light of the fact that the investigation is completed, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.

¶20

5.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be relased on bail subject to the following conditions:-

¶21

(a)the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) each, with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Special Court for Exclusive Trial under POCSO Act, Villupuram;

¶22

(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;

¶23

( c)the petitioners are directed to report before the Investigating Officer every Monday at 10.00 a.m., and on all hearing dates without fail;

¶24

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

¶25

(e)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY

¶29

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104. TO

¶30

1 THE SPECIAL COURT FOR EXCLUSIVE TRIAL UNDER POCSO ACT, VILLUPURAM.

¶31

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶32

3 THE STATION HOUSING OFFICER ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, GINGEE, VILLUPURAM DISTRICT.

¶33

4 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, CUDDALORE.

¶34

+1 CC to M/S M.DEVARAJ Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.10369 CRL OP.15313/2022 Date :04/07/2022

¶35

TA-05/07/2022

¶36

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

Prabu v. the Station Housing Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabu v. the Station Housing Officer

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

Suresh Kumar Vs State Rep. by

Ganesan Vs the State Rep by Its

Jaisingh @ John Jaisingh Vs the State Rep by

P.G.Karthikeyan Vs v.Hema Latha

Abbu Sikkanthar, M/46, Vs State Rep.by the Inspector of

Dhamayanthi Rajkumar Vs the State by