Supreme Court in P.K. Shaji v. State of Kerala

CRL.OP(MD). No.4313 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED: 13.03.2025PRESENTTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVELCRL.OP(MD). No.4313 of 2025Radhakrishnan... Petitioner / Accused No.2Vs.The State of Tamil Nadu rep byThe Inspector of Police,All Women Police Station,Keelakarai,Ramanathapuram District.(Crime No.2 of 2025)... Respondent / ComplainantShenbagam...Intervene Petitioner/Defacto ComplainantPRAYER :- The Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 praying to grant pre-arrest bail to thepetitioner in Crime No.2 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.For Petitioner :Mr.Subash Babu,Senior Advocatefor Mr.C.Susikumar, Advocatefor M/s.Subash Law OfficeFor Respondent:Mr.S.S.Manoj,Government Advocate(Criminal Side)For Intervener:Mr.A.R.Kannappan,Advocate1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP(MD). No.4313 of 2025ORDER : The Court made the following order :-This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner on 05.03.2025under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, prayingto grant an order of pre-arrest bail.2. The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent- police forthe offences punishable under Sections 7 read with Sections 8, 16 and 17 of theProtection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and Sections 294(b), 323 and506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.2 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the defactocomplainant are husband and wife. They were blessed with two female children.The defacto complainant has alleged that she has been facing continuousharassment at the hands of the petitioner. Furthermore, in 2019, A1, the petitioner'sfather, is said to have removed her elder daughter's dress and kissed her with evilintent. As a result, her children became afraid to go to A1's house. On 02.10.2023, A1allegedly misbehaved with her younger daughter by touching her private parts.When she informed the petitioner about the incident, he, in turn, threatened her notto disclose it to anyone and issued a serious life threat. Subsequently, the petitionerdid not allow their children to attend school. Even thereafter, the defactocomplainant continued to face harassment at the hands of the petitioner. Based on2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP(MD). No.4313 of 2025the above allegations, an FIR was registered. Hence, the case.4. Mr.Subash Babu, the learned senior counsel appearing for Mr.C.Susikumar,the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is an innocentperson and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and hehas been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that during theparticular period, the petitioner was working as an Assistant Manager in AmirthaHospital, Faridabad, Haryana and that there was a matrimonial dispute between thepetitioner and the defacto complainant and that in order to grab the house propertyof the petitioner worth about Rs.50,00,000/-, the defacto complainant has lodged thefalse complaint. He however submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by anyconditions to be imposed by this Court. He therefore prays for grant of pre-arrestbail to the petitioner.5. Per contra, Mr.S.S.Manoj, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side)appearing for the respondent-police, submits that there was a property dispute aswell as matrimonial dispute between the parties. He further submits that thepetitioner and his family continuously harassed the defacto complainant and herdaughters. Therefore, he contends that, if pre-arrest bail is granted to the petitioner,he will cause threat to the defacto complainant and the victim girls. Accordingly, heprays to dismiss this Criminal Original Petition.3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP(MD). No.4313 of 20256. Heard on both sides. This Court has perused the records. 7. In view of the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner, this Court is ofthe opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary in this case.The petitioner has permanent residence and deep roots in the society. Therefore,there is less possibility for absconding. Considering the above and also consideringthe facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of the fact that there areno previous cases against the petitioner and with a view to give an opportunity tothe petitioner to reform himself, this Court is inclined to grant an order of pre-arrestbail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions.(i) The petitioner shall be released on pre-arrest bail in the event of his arrestor in the event of his surrender before the learned Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court,Ramanathapuram, within a period of 15 days from date on which the order copy ismade ready, on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty FiveThousand only) along with two sureties each for a like sum of Rs.25,000/- (RupeesTwenty Five Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the learned Judge, Fast TrackMahila Court, Ramanathapuram.(ii) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in theApplication for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules ofPractice, 2019']. The learned Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Ramanathapuram shall4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP(MD). No.4313 of 2025obtain a copy of any one of identity proofs to ensure their identity. (iii) The petitioner shall appear and sign before the respondent-police daily at10.00 a.m. until further orders.(iv) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a policeofficer as and when required.(v) The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threator promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade himfrom disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.(vi) The petitioner shall also not, directly or indirectly, cause any threat to thedefacto complainant, the victim girls and witnesses and shall not tamper theevidence.(vii) The petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission ofthe Court.(viii) The petitioner shall furnish his residential address and mobile numberto the learned Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Ramanathapuram.(ix) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Judge,Fast Track Mahila Court, Ramanathapuram or Trial Court, as the case may be, isentitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law asif the aforementioned conditions are imposed by him as laid down by the Hon'ble5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP(MD). No.4313 of 2025Supreme Court in P.K. Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283]. 8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed subject to theconditions stated supra. sd/- 13.03.2025 / TRUE COPY / /03/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. pal To1.The Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Ramanathapuram.2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Keelakarai, Ramanathapuram District.3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.+1 CC to M/s.M/S.SUBASH LAW OFFICE, Advocate ( SR-2838[I] dated 14/03/2025 )Order made inCRL.OP(MD). No.4313 of 202513.03.2025 SL(26.03.2025)/ 6P/ 5CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17.07.2023.6/6