Praveenkumar vs State

C.Kumarappan, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 01.03.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 7 & 8 of POCSO Act, 2012 in Crime No.6 of 2016, after investigation respondent police filed final report for the offence under Section 9(m) r/w Section 10 of POCSO Act, 2012 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, who is the paternal uncle of the victim, while taking the victim from Aaalakottai to Mannargudi, allegedly made inappropriate touch on the victim and warned her not to disclose the same. The victim later informed her grandmother and complaint was lodged.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is under the POCSO Act. It is further submitted that the petitioner is aged about 26 years and he is none other than the paternal uncle of the victim. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 01.03.2026 and the investigation has already been completed and final report has been filed. It is also submitted that the case is now pending before the Fast Track Mahila Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the statement under Section 183 of BNSS has been recorded and from the perusal of the same, there are allegations against this petitioner. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

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

Considering the submission of the learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the view that from the perusal of the 183 statement of B.N.S.S, there are allegations against this petitioner. However, taking into consideration the long incarceration since 01.03.2026 and upon the fact that the investigation has been completed and the case is taken on file as Spl.S.C.No.16 of 2026, 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 for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Tiruvarur, 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 is directed to stay at Nagapattinam and report before the Velipalayam Police Station, Nagapattinam daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks 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 petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.