Allowed

Veerasamy v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC13 Sept 2022CRL OP(MD)/14022/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner accused of offences under POCSO Act and IPC. The prosecution alleged false promises to marry following a love affair. Bail was granted with conditions including reporting daily and executing a bond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on execution of a bond Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, reporting daily to police for one month, and abiding by specified conditions.

Veerasamy Vs The Inspector of Police — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.14022 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 13/09/2022

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The Hon`ble Mrs.Justice R.THARANI

¶7

CRL OP(MD). No.14022 of 2022

¶8

Veerasamy ... Petitioner/Sole Accused

¶9

¶10

The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District. Crime No.19 of 2022. ... Respondent/Complainant

¶11

For Petitioner : M/s.Jothibasu M, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶12

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C

¶13

PRAYER :-

¶14

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.19 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent Police.

¶15

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶16

The petitioner/Accused, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 11(4), 12 of POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 506(i) IPC in Crime No.19 of 2022, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶17

The case of the prosecution is that due to love affair between the petitioner and the victim, the petitioner gave a false promise to marry the victim and had physical relationship with her. Hence, the complaint.

¶18

3.On the side of the petitioner it is stated that a false case was foisted against the petitioner. Due to love affair, a false complaint was given against the petitioner. Hence, prays to release https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis him on anticipatory bail.

¶19

1/3

¶20

CRL OP(MD). No.14022 of 2022

¶21

4.On the side of the prosecution, it is stated that the petitioner gave a false promise to marry the victim and had physical relationship with her, later refused to marry her and prayed to dismiss the petition.

¶22

5.Considering the nature of the offence, love affair and the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶23

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of POCSO Act Cases, Srivilliputhur, on condition that the petitioner shall 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 respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Judge concerned and on further conditions that:

¶24

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;

¶25

(b)the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 am for a period of one month and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.

¶26

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

¶27

(d)the petitioner shall be present before the Court on hearing dates and before the respondent police as and when required;

¶28

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

¶29

/ TRUE COPY / /09/2022

¶30

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

2/3

¶33

CRL OP(MD). No.14022 of 2022

¶34

¶35

THE JUDGE,

¶36

SPECIAL COURT FOR EXCLUSIVE TRIAL OF POCSO ACT CASES, SRIVILLIPUTHUR.

¶37

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, SRIVILLIPUTTUR, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

¶38

THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶39

+1 CC to M/s.G.M.LAW OFFICE, Advocate ( SR-9935[I] dated 14/09/2022 )

¶40

pnm

¶41

USK/SBN/SAR-I/22.09.2022/3P/5C

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶43

3/3

Veerasamy v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Veerasamy v. The Inspector of Police

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. Swarnavel, Vs Logarani

Branch Manager, Vs Muthu

Karthigaiselvi, D/O.Ganesan Vs the Inspector of Police

Sulathan Sahul Hameed Vs The Inspector of Police

Manjula Vs The Inspector of Police

Natheesh Vs The Inspector of Police