Ashokraj vs State Rep By
2022 Latest Caselaw 7322 Mad

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 7322 Mad
Judgement Date : 7 April, 2022

Madras High Court

Ashokraj vs State Rep By on 7 April, 2022

                                                                                Crl.A.No.298 of 2022



                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED: 07.04.2022

                                                       CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN

                                                Crl.A.No.298 of 2022

                     Ashokraj                                       ... Appellant/Accused

                                                            vs.

                     1.State rep by
                       Superintendent of Police,
                       Dharmapuri District
                     2.The Inspector of Police,
                       All Women Police Station,
                       Dharmapuri District.
                       (Crime No.2 of 2022)
                     3.Vishalakshi                                      ...   Respondents


                     PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Schedule

                     Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), Amendment Act,

                     praying to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.35 of 2022 dated

                     15.02.2022 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila

                     Court, Dharmapuri and enlarge the appellant on bail in crime No.2 of 2022

                     on the file of the second respondent police.



                     1/8


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                Crl.A.No.298 of 2022




                                  For Appellant            : Mr.N.Ponraj


                                  For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam
                                                          Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

                                  For Respondent-3         :   No appearance

                                                     JUDGMENT

Being dissatisfied with the order dated 15.02.2022 passed in

Crl.M.P.No.35 of 2022, on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track

Mahila Court, Dharmapuri, the appellant who is arrayed as accused in crime

No.2 of 2022 on the file of All Women Police Station, Dharmapuri,

preferred the appeal praying to set aside the order dated 15.02.2022 and to

enlarge him on bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant

belongs to the Adidravidar Community and the appellant belongs to the

Vanniyar Community. On 07.01.2022 around 11.00 a.m., the daughter of

the defacto complainant by name Devi, aged about 14 years, along with her

sisters went to a bank in Ariyakulam to get their scholarship amount, but the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.298 of 2022

said Devi alone did not return. On enquiry, it came to know that the said

Devi was talking with one person on the Ariyakulam bus stop and went

along with him in a bike Hence, a case has been registered against him

under Sections 363 and 366 of IPC. It was further alleged that on

09.01.2022, the alleged victim girl was secured and on enquiry it was came

to know that her mother used to quarrel with the alleged victim girl insisting

her to perform household works and in such circumstances, she got

acquaintance with the appellant and eloped with him and had sexual

intercourse. Hence, section of law altered as Sections 363, 366 of IPC and

Section 5(1) r/w 6 of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA)

Amendment Act, 2015.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the

appellant is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this

case. He would further submit that the appellant herein committed this

offence due to the compulsion made by the victim girl. In fact, during the

relevant point of time, the appellant has not taken any efforts for committing

this offence. Instead of considering the same, the respondent police foisted a

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.298 of 2022

false case against this appellant. Further, the appellant is in the judicial

custody from 14.01.2022 onwards. Hence, he prays for bail.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

appearing for the respondent/Police raised objection stating that

investigation is pending. However, he admits as of now, portion of

investigation has been completed. Further, material objects which are all

necessary for proving the alleged offence, are all recovered by the

respondent police.

5. Under Section 15A of the SC/ST Act, notice has been sent to

the defacto complainant and after receipt of the same, nobody has appeared

on behalf of him.

6. The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on

either side are considered.

7. The respondent police initially registered a case as against

the appellant for the offence under Sections 363 and 366 of IPC

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.298 of 2022

subsequently altered into Sections 363, 366 of IPC and Section 5(1) r/w 6 of

POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Amendment Act, 2015. Now on

go through the averments found in the first information report as well as in

the statement given by the victim child, she alone compelled the accused to

take away from her residence. As of now, after securing the victim child and

the accused, respective statements have been recorded and medical

examination has also been completed. Therefore, further custody of the

appellant is not necessary for completing the investigation. Moreover, it is

reported that the appellant is the first accused.

8. Therefore, taking into consideration of all the above said

aspects, particularly considering the period of incarceration, this Court is

inclined to grant bail to the appellant subject to certain conditions.

9. Accordingly, the appellant is ordered to be released on bail

subject to the following conditions;

(a) the appellant shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.298 of 2022

sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri.

(b) the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar Card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity;

(d) the appellant shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(e) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the appellant in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the appellant released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.298 of 2022

In the result, the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge,

Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri in Crl.M.P.No.35 of 2022 dated

15.02.2022 is set aside and the Criminal Appeal is accordingly allowed.

07.04.2022

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order lok

1.The learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri

2.The Superintendent of Police, Dharmapuri District

3.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Dharmapuri District.

4.The District Prison, Dharmapuri.

5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.