AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
14 paragraphs · 661 wordsDr Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J
This Criminal Appeal has been filed against dismissal of the bail application vide impugned Order dated 19.02.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.111 of 2025 on the file of the Court of Special Judge for Trial of Offences under the POCSO Act, Chittoor in connection with Crime No.182 of 2024 of I Town Police Station, Chittoor, which is registered against the Petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 IPC and Section 5(1)(j)(ii) of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (PoA) Act.
The case of the Prosecution, in brief, is that the Petitioner/Accused developed friendship with the minor girl who belongs to Scheduled Caste through Instagram. By saying deceitful words and by threatening her, he committed rape against the minor girl several times. She became pregnant. Basing on the complaint given by the father of the victim girl, a Criminal case has been lodged and registered against the Petitioner/Accused viz., Crime No.182 of 2024 of I Town Police Station, Chittoor. Petitioner is aged about 21 years and completed graduation. The bail application vide Crl.M.P.No.111 of 2025 filed by the Petitioner/Accused was dismissed by order dated 19.02.2025 by the learned Special Judge for Trial of Offences under the POCSO Act, Chittoor. Hence, the Petitioner filed the present Criminal Appeal seeking to grant regular bail to him.
Heard Sri D.Purnachandra Reddy, learned counsel for the Appellant/Accused and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. Perused the material on record.
Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner has been in judicial custody since 13.12.2024 and investigation is almost completed and preliminary charge sheet has been filed. Further, there are no criminal antecedents against the Petitioner. Learned counsel would further submit that petitioner is ready and willing to fulfill the conditions as imposed by this Court. Finally, prays to release the Petitioner on bail by imposing any conditions.
On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that there is a prima facie case made out against the petitioner and the learned Special Judge has rightly dismissed the bail petition and that there are no valid grounds to interfere in the impugned order.
Considering the submissions and a fair look at the material placed on record would show that the Petitioner has been in judicial custody since 13.12.2024. Investigation has been completed and a preliminary charge sheet came to be filed before the Trial Court. Hence, the question of influencing the witnesses/tampering the evidence does not arise at all. As stated by learned counsel, Appellant is ready to abide by the conditions imposed in the event of grant of bail.
In such circumstances, this Court is inclined to enlarge the Appellant/Accused on bail.
In the result, the Criminal Appeal is allowed setting aside the Order dated 19.02.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.111 of 2025 on the file of the Court of Special Judge for Trial of Offences under the POCSO Act, Chittoor and consequently, bail is granted to the Appellant / Accused on the following conditions:
i. The Appellant / Accused shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousands only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Court of IV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chittoor.
ii. On release, the Appellant shall appear before the Station House Officer, concerned, on every day between 10.00 a.m. and 05.00 p.m., until further orders.
iii. The Appellant is directed not to hamper the investigation and tamper with the prosecution witnesses and not to speak with the victim in any manner.
iv. It is made clear that the Appellant shall scrupulously comply with the above conditions and breach of any of the above conditions will be viewed seriously and prosecution is at liberty to move an application for cancellation of the bail.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand
