High Court · 2025

Crl.A(MD)No.331 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED :21.03.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHICrl.A(MD)No.331 of 2025M.Senthil Kumar ... AppellantVs1.State of Tamil Nadu Represented by The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Puliyangudi Sub Division, Tenkasi District.2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Puliangudi Police Station, Tenkasi District. Crime No.1 of 2025.3.Muthujyanthi ... RespondentsPRAYER: Appeal filed under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call forthe records relating tot he impugned order passed in Crl.M.P.No.260 of 2025, dated05.03.2025, on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tenkasi and set asidethe same as illegal and arbitrary and enlarge the appellant/accused No.2 in CrimeNo.1 of 2025, on the file of the first respondent on bail. For Appellant: Mr.V.Kathirvelu, Senior CounselFor R1 & R2: Mr.A.S.Abdul Kalam Asad Government AdvocateR3: Party in person1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A(MD)No.331 of 2025J U D G M E N TThis appellant/A2 in Crime No.1 of 2025, was arrested by respondent police on30.01.2025, for the offence under Sections 5(a)(i) & 6 of POCSO Act and 137(2), 142,144(1), 115(2) of BNS and 3(1)(r), 3(2)(va) of SC and ST Act. The bail application filedby this appellant before the Sessions Court, Theni in Cr.MP No.260 of 2025 was takenup by the learned Sessions Judge, along with the application filed by the accused 1 &3 in Crime No.1 of 2025 and all of them were dismissed by a common order, dated05.03.2025. As against the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, rejecting thebail application of this appellant, this Criminal Appeal is filed. 2. Since the case has been registered for the offence under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(2)(va) of SC and ST Act, as against this appellant, this Court, by its order, dated17.03.2025 has ordered notice to the defacto complainant and the defacto complainantis also present before this Court.3.The learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the firstaccused had some issues with the Inspector of Police, Sivagiri. He was said to havecirculated a video, as if there are corruptions in the Sivagiri Police Station and onaccount of that, an action was taken as against the first accused and the Inspector ofPolice, Sivagiri Police Station. According to the learned senior counsel, since A1 hasdefamed the reputation of Sivagiri Police among the public, this case has been foisted2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A(MD)No.331 of 2025as against A1, A3 and this appellant is also added as an accused that this appellantand A3 have assisted A1 in the circulation of video. The learned senior counsel byreferring the First Information Report registered in Crime No.1 of 2025 submits thateven according to the defacto complainant, she is 19 years old. However, to make outa case under the POCSO Act, it was projected that this incident was taken place whenshe was 17 years and 9 months. Even as per the First Information Report, thisappellant was standing outside the pump set room, wherein A1 has abused thisvictim girl. The learned senior counsel by referring to the orders of the Sessions Courtand submits that the learned Session judge has mechanically rejected the bailapplication filed by this appellant, by taking note of the statement made by thevictim. He further submits that this appellant is a police constable and he is in jailfrom 30.01.2025. 4.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 & 2submits that this appellant was present all along with the accused No.1 at the time ofcommission of offence and therefore, according to him, he had a knowledge about thecommission of offence. There is a specific allegation and his presence in theoccurrence place was mentioned by the defacto complainant.5.The defacto complainant is present before this Court. This Court has verifiedwith the defacto complainant. She submits that if this appellant is released on bail,3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A(MD)No.331 of 2025then he may harass her. The defacto complainant is not aware that by which accused,this appeal is filed. The narration made by defacto complainant creates an impressionthat she has been tutored in such a manner to make such a statement. The defactocomplainant is not in a position to explain the reasons for her apprehension and therole played by the appellant in the commission of offence. After perusing the FirstInformation Report, this Court has posed a question to the Defacto complainant as towhere she was working at the time of occurrence. She was not in a position to answerimmediately and after few minutes, she made a statement that she was working inNIMS hospital and thereafter changed her statement that she was working in RadhaDental Clinic. When this Court has verified whether she is a qualified nurse, sheclaims that she has attended certain training programme in that clinic. 6.This Court is not confident with the narration made by the defactocomplainant. This Court is of the view that the investigation in this case has not beenconducted in a proper manner and therefore this Court directs the AdditionalSuperintendent of Police, Tenkasi to monitor the investigation in this case and findout the truth. 7.In view of the above observations and considering the facts and circumstancesof this case, this Court is inclined to release the appellant on bail.8. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is allowed and the order passed by the4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A(MD)No.331 of 2025learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tenkasi in Crl.M.P.No.260 of 2025, dated05.03.2025, is hereby set aside. The appellant is ordered to be released on bail on thefollowing conditions:-i) The appellant shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees TwentyFive Thousand) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learnedPrincipal Sessions Judge, Tenkasi.ii) The appellant and the sureties shall submit a copy of their Aadhaar Card orany other identity card issued by the Government in proof of their residence address;iii)The appellant shall appear before the respondent police as and whenrequired by the respondent police. iv) The appellant shall not misuse the liberty granted to him by indulging inany further offence and shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. Theappellant shall co-operate for the investigation.v) On violation of any of the above conditions by the appellant, the respondentpolice shall move an application for cancellation of the bail. sd/- 21/03/2025/ TRUE COPY / 21/03/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. vrn5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A(MD)No.331 of 2025TO1 THE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE, TENKASI.2 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PULIYANGUDI SUB DIVISION,TENKASI DISTRICT.3 THE ADDITIONAL SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, TENKASI.4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION,PULIANGUDI POLICE STATION, TENKASI DISTRICT.5 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PALAYAMKOTTAI, TIRUNELVELI.6 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. C.C. to MR.K.PRABHU Advocate SR.No.19025[F] Dated 21/03/2025 ORDER IN CRL A(MD) No.331 of 2025 Date :21/03/2025RS/IT/SAR-(21.03.2025) 6P 8CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/20236/6