Arankoor Rajesh @ Ramesh vs State

C.Kumarappan, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.02.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 11(4), 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and 329, 296(b), 351(2) of BNS in Crime No.03 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the alleged occurrence took place on 25.01.2026 near the house of the complainant’s mother-in-law, namely Rani. It is alleged that the petitioner went to the residence of the victim and requested that the victim be given in marriage to him. Hence, the complaint.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 04.02.2026 and is willing to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the statement of the victim girl was recorded under Section 183 of BNSS on 04.03.2026, and in the said statement, there is no allegation of any serious physical assault against the petitioner. However, he opposed the grant of bail.

I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

On such perusal, this Court finds that the issue appears to have arisen out of an altercation between the petitioner and the victim’s family. Considering the period of incarceration of the petitioner since 04.02.2026, and in view of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, wherein no serious allegations are made against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, subject to certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur, and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for the period of 30 days and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions,

the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.