Madras High Court
Manikandan vs The Commissioner Of Police on 11 January, 2022
Crl.A.No.662 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.01.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
Crl.A.No.662 of 2021
Manikandan ... Appellant
Vs.
1. The Commissioner of Police,
O/o. The Commissioner of Police,
Vepery, Chennai.
2. The Inspector of Police,
W-12, All Women Police Station,
Harbour Range,
Chennai.
3. Mrs.Maheswari ... Respondents
PRAYER: The Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 14 (A)(2) of
SC/ST Act,1989 to set aside the order passed by the Special Court for
exclusive for trial of cases under POCSO act at Chennai, in
Crl.M.P.No.968 of 2021 dated 05.10.2021 and enlarge the appellant on
bail pending trial in Spl.S.C.No.54 of 2021 in Special Court for exclusive
for trial of cases under POCSO act, Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr.K.Poongundran
For R1 & R2 : Mr.S.Sugendran
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
For R3 : Mr.S.Seenivasan
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.A.No.662 of 2021
ORDER
(This case has been heard through video conference)
This Criminal Appeal has been filed against the Judgment
passed by the Special Court for exclusive for trial of cases under POCSO
act at Chennai, in Crl.M.P.No.968 of 2021 in Spl.S.C.No.54 of 2021
dated 05.10.2021, dismissing the petition filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C seeking Bail.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution is as under:-
The appellant was arrested and he is in Judicial custody from
06.10.2020 for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 6,
5(1)(m) of POCSO Act, 2012, r/w 376 AB of IPC r/w 3(2)(v) of SC/ST
(POA) Act. The allegation against the appellant is that he had ravished
the victim girl, aged about 11 years, who belongs to the Schedule Caste
community, by committing penetrative sexual assault. The appellant had
filed a petition seeking for bail in Crl.M.P.No.968 of 2021 before the
Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chennai
and the learned Judge by an order dated 05.10.2021, had dismissed the
bail application, against which the present appeal has been filed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.A.No.662 of 2021
3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the
appellant was arrested on 06.10.2020 and he is in custody for more than
one year and three months. He would further submit that the complaint
has been given by the mother of the victim due to previous enmity and
the appellant has to come out and conduct the trial and thereby, he would
seek for bail.
4. Mr.S.Sugendran, learned Government Advocate (crl.side) would
submit that it is the case where, the appellant, who is the neighbor of the
victim girl, had committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim. He
would further submit that the final report has been filed and the
cognizance of the case has been taken and it is pending for trial in
Spl.SC.No.54 of 2021 on the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial
of Cases under POCSO Act, Chennai. He would further submit that the
appellant is a married man, aged about 27 years and had committed
penetrative sexual assault on the victim girl child, aged about 11 years,
the child was immediately taken to the hospital and the Doctors have
found bleeding injuries in the private parts of the victim child. There are
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.A.No.662 of 2021
medical evidence available with regard to the offences and the victim
was treated with sutures, which shows the seriousness of the offence
committed by the appellant and the appellant is the neighbor of the
victim and at this stage, if the bail is granted to the appellant, there is
every possibility of threatening the witnesses.
5. Learned counsel appearing for R3/ de facto complainant objects
for grant of bail.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the
materials available on record.
7. It is the case where the appellant is alleged to have ravished the
11 years old child by committing penetrative sexual assault on her.
Perusal of records shows that there is medical evidence to prove that the
victim has been ravished. Taking into consideration the serious nature of
the offence, this Court is not inclined to allow the appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.A.No.662 of 2021
8. This Criminal Appeal stands dismissed accordingly. The Trial
Judge is directed to complete the trial as expeditiously as possible
preferably, within a period of four months.
11.01.2022
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
shk/ham
To
1. Special Court for exclusive for trial of cases
under POCSO, Chennai
2. The Commissioner of Police,
O/o. The Commissioner of Police,
Vepery, Chennai.
3. The Inspector of Police,
W-12, All Women Police Station,
Harbour Range,
Chennai.
4.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.A.No.662 of 2021
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA,J.
shk/ham
Crl.A.No.662 of 2021
11.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
