John @ Janakiraman vs The Deputy Superintendent Of ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 8913 Mad

                                                                                      Crl.A.No.389 of 2022



                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                    DATED: 27.04.2022

                                                         CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN

                                                    Crl.A.No.389 of 2022

                     John @ Janakiraman                                          ... Appellant/accused

                                                              vs.

                     State by:
                     1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
                       Arakkonam,
                       Ranipet District
                     2.The Inspector of Police,
                       All Women Police Station,
                       Arakkonam, Ranipet District
                       (crime No.20 of 2021)
                     3.Priya                                               ...     Respondents

                     PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Schedule
                     Castes and the Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 praying
                     to set aside the order passed in C.M.P.No.121 of 2022 dated 05.03.2022 on
                     the file of the learned Special Judge for Exclusive Trial of Cases under
                     POCSO Act, 2012, Vellore and enlarge the appellant on bail in crime No.20
                     of 2021 on the file of the second respondent police.
                                    For Appellant             : Mr.C.Chokkalingam



                     1/6


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                   Crl.A.No.389 of 2022



                                  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 05.03.2022 made in

CMP.No.121 of 2022 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Vellore, the

appellant, who is arrayed as A1 in connection with crime No.20 of 2021 on

the file of the second respondent police, filed this appeal praying to set aside

the above referred order and to enlarge him on bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the victim child in the

alleged occurrence is aged about 13 years. During the relevant point of time,

the victim child is having the habit to play with the accused and on the day

of occurrence, the appellant and two others, while at the time the victim

child went to attend natural call, brought her to somebody's house and

committed an offence of rape. While at the time the victim child raised

objection, the appellant and others assaulted her and also made threatening.

Further, by using the wooden log, they attacked the victim child on her

abdomen and cheek. After the occurrence, the same was informed to her

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.389 of 2022

father and later, on the complaint, the case has been registered and all the

accused were secured and remanded to judicial custody. Afterwards, they

filed application before the learned Sessions Judge, Vellore and the same

has been dismissed. Therefore, the appellant is before this Court with the

prayer to set aside the impugned order dated 05.03.2022 by enlarging him

on bail.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would

contend that the appellant is an innocent person and he has been falsely

implicated in this case. He would further contend that the appellant is in the

judicial custody for the past 115 days and as of now, portion of

investigation has been completed and therefore, he may be released on bail.

4. On the other hand, the learned Government

Advocate(crl.side) appearing for the respondent police raised objection

stating that the offence committed by the appellant is heinous in nature.

Though the investigation has been completed, it is not a fit case to enlarge

the appellant on bail.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.389 of 2022

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

the defacto complainant and after receipt of the same, none appeared on

behalf of the defacto complainant.

6. Submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on

either side are considered.

7. As already stated, here it is a case, the averment in the first

information report as well as the statement recorded from the victim child

under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. would go to reveal the fact that while at the

time of occurrence, the appellant and two other accused committed

penetrative sexual assault on a girl who is aged about 13 years. More than

that, the accused in this case repeatedly committed the said offence by

utilising the poverty of the victim child. Therefore, the offene committed by

the appellant is nothing but heinous one and therefore, considering the

gravity of the offence committed by the appellant, this Court is not inclined

to allow this appeal.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.389 of 2022

8. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is dismissed.

27.04.2022

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

To

1.The learned Special Judge for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, 2012, Vellore

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Arakkonam, Ranipet District

3.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Arakkonam, Ranipet District

4.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Vellore.

5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.389 of 2022

R. PONGIAPPAN, J.

lok

Crl.A.No.389 of 2022

27.04.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis