Thenmozhi @ Reeta John Joseph v. The State of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 21/07/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI Thenmozhi @ Reeta John Joseph, W/o.Shankar.

..Petitioner/ Accused No.2

Vs The State of Tamilnadu rep.by The Inspector of Police, Dindigul Town North Police Station, Dindigul District. (Crime No.471 of 2025) .. Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : M/s.KA.Raamakrishnan

Advocate

For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.471 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : This Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused No.2, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 5(I), 16 r/w.6(l), 17 of POCSO Act in Crime No.471 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that this petitioner's son namely Saravanan aged about 19 years and the victim girl is aged about 17 years, they loved each other. The victim girl eloped with the said Saravanan. Later, the victim and the first accused were secured and on investigation it was revealed that this petitioner helped the victim and the first accused. The first accused committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault against the victim girl. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there are totally three accused persons, this petitioner was arrayed as accused No.2. The respondent police has lodged a false complaint against this petitioner. The petitioner is an innocent person and she has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. This petitioner is no way connected with this case, she is the mother of the first accused and she gave advise to both the victim and the first accused. This petitioner is in judicial custody with one year old female child. The petitioner is ready and willing to abide any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. He would further submit that the petitioner is in custody from 27.06.2025 nearly 25 days. Hence, he seeks bail.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that the first accused had committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault against the victim girl. The first accused took the victim girl with the help of this petitioner and both were went to Trichy to Tiruvarur and Tiruvarur to Vellankanni, there they both stayed at hotel room and the first accused forcibly had aggravated penetrative sexual assault against the victim girl. In this case, Section 183 BNSS statement was recorded. There is no previous case against this petitioner. However, he objected to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶5Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of the fact that in this case, FIR was registered on 13.06.2025, by this time most of the investigation might have been completed, Section 183 BNSS statement was recorded from the victim girl, the victim girl has not stated anything about the involvement of this petitioner, this petitioner is a lady, she is in judicial custody with one year old female child, there is no specific overtact against this petitioner, there is no previous case against this petitioner, the petitioner/accused No.2 remanded into judicial custody on 27.06.2025, taking into consideration of the period of incarceration, this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

¶6Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of learned Special Court for Exclusive trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul and on further conditions that :- [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity. [b] The petitioner shall furnish her residential address and contact number to the learned Special Court for Exclusive trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul. If the petitioner changes her residential address, she shall report the same to the learned Special Court for Exclusive trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul; [c] the petitioner shall appear and sign before the respondent police daily at

10.30a.m. until further orders. [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court herself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

sd/-

21/07/2025

/ TRUE COPY /

/ /2025

Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV )

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

Madurai - 625 023. gvn To:

¶1The Judge, Special Court for Exclusive trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Dindigul.

¶2The Superintendent, Central Prison(Women Cell), Madurai.

¶3The Inspector of Police, Dindigul Town North Police Station, Dindigul District.

¶4The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12200 of 2025 Date :21/07/2025

SBN/22.07.2025 6P/5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023