M.Praveen vs State Of Tamilnadu

P. Dhanabal, J

The petitioner / Accused No.3, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 13.08.2024, for the offences punishable under Sections 78, 127(8), 127(8) r/w Section 54, 308(5), 309(6), 76, 76 r/w Section 70(1), 351(3), 75, 118(1) of BNS, 2023 and Section 67A of Information Technology Act, 2000, in Crime No.13 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons forcibly obtained the mobile phone, ATM Card, and other personal belongings of the defacto complainant. Thereafter, they detained her in a shed and assault her to give the password and pin numbers. Thereafter, they committed sexual assault upon the victim girl and vedio graphed the same as directed by the first accused. Hence, the case.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the co-accused was released on bail. He would further submit that the petitioner is in custody for 1.8 years. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

The learned counsel for the intervenor represented the defacto complainant and would submit that the defacto complainant is going to file intervene petition. He also objected to grant bail to the petitioner on the ground that the offences are grave in nature and the petitioner along with other accused persons committed gang rape upon the victim. Hence, he opposed to grant bail.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. The petitioner along with other accused persons committed gang rape upon the victim and subsequently, they escaped from the place of occurrence and they have been secured by a special team. He would further submit that the investigation has been completed and final report has been filed and now the case in S.C.No.278 of 2024 on the file of the Principal Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Thanjavur, is pending for examining the further witnesses. He would further submit that the petitioner has two previous cases. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, considering the nature of charges levelled against the petitioner, already investigation has been completed and final report has been filed and now the case in S.C.No.278 of 2024 on the file of the Principal Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Thanjavur, is pending for examining the further witnesses and already material witnesses were examined and the co-accused was released on bail and though the petitioner has two previous cases, the same are not similar kind of offences and in both cases, he was released on bail and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner from 13.08.2024, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

[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 Special POCSO Court, Thanjavur, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the Special POCSO Court, Thanjavur, on all working days at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected;

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

[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[f] 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].

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.