N.Raisulla vs State

C.Kumarappan, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.03.2026, for alleged offences punishable under Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, in Crime No.37 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner allegedly made inappropriate gestures and hand signals toward a nine-year-old minor girl. It is further alleged that he followed the child from a restaurant and threw a piece of paper containing a phone number at her. Hence, the case was registered.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated based on exaggerated allegations. He further submits that the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen with no previous criminal cases pending against him. Accordingly, he prays for the grant of bail.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent, while opposing the grant of bail, reiterated the prosecution case and, on instructions, fairly submitted that the petitioner has no bad antecedents.

I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the nature of the allegations involving gestures and hand signals, the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner since 23.03.2026, and the fact that the petitioner has no prior criminal antecedents, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case 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 Fast Track Court exclusively to deal with Offences under the POCSO Act, Puducherry, and subject to the following conditions:

[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 everyday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of 15 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 take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions had been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court itself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];

[f] if the petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.