SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Mad) 3806

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
R. Henry Paul – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
Crl. O.P. No. 14316 of 2021
Decided On : 31-01-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: M. Devaraj.
For the Respondent: E. Raj Thilak.

Headnote:

Constitution of India , 1949 - Article 21 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 506 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 , 167, 164 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 - Section 17, 6 - First Information Report - Punishment for committing offence of criminal intimidation - Petition has been filed to direct Sessions Judge Special Court for Exclusive Trial receive application filed entertain release petitioner on default bail in Crime respondent Police - Held, Court decision issue whether included or excluded while considering statutory period entitlement of default bail framing questioning of law - Criminal Rules of Practice framed by Court mandates including herein clearly charge sheet not filed petitioner is entitled for statutory bail granted - Criminal Original Petition is allowed

ORDER

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial under POCSO Act, Chennai, to receive the application filed under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C., in Crl.M.P.SR.No. 337 of 2021 and entertain the same and release the petitioner on default bail in Crime No. 6 of 2021 on the file of the respondent Police.

1. This petition has been filed to direct the Sessions Judge Special Court for Exclusive Trial under POCSO Act, Chennai, to receive the application filed under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C., in Crl.M.P.SR.No. 337 of 2021 and entertain the same and release the petitioner on default bail in Crime No. 6 of 2021 on the file of the respondent Police.

2. The petitioner/A2 in Crime No. 6 of 2021, which was registered for the offence under Sections 10 r/w 9(1) (m) (n) and Section 17 of POCSO Act and Section 506(ii) of IPC based on the complaint dated 12.04.2021. The petitioner was arrested on 23.04.2021 and remanded to Judicial Custody on 24.04.2021.

3. The gist of the complaint is that the defacto complainant is a singer by profession and the victim girl is her daughter. Due to her professional requirement, she left her daughter under the care and custody of her sister/A4 from the age of 6 years. While the victim girl was under the care and custody of A4, she was subjected to sexual assault and harassment by A1, who is A4's husband, A2/the petitioner herein, a Pastor in a Church, and A3, relative of A1. The victim was subjected to harassment till the age of 15 years. But A4, the maternal aunt of the victim girl, was a silent spectator. During January 2020, the victim girl unable to bear the sexual assault and harassment informed her mother defacto complainant through neighbour's mobile. Immediately, defacto complainant, the mother of the victim girl, took the victim girl with her. During her stay with her mother, the victim was found uneasy. When she was examined by a psychologist, the victim girl narrated the sexual assault committed on her from the age of six. Based on which, the mother of the victim girl lodged a complaint and a case was registered against the petitioner and 3 others. The petitioner was arrested on 23.04.2021 and remanded on 24.04.2021.

4. The contention of the petitioner is that he moved a bail application in Crl.M.P.No. 459 of 2021 on merits. The Trial Court by order dated 04.05.2021, dismissed the same for the reason statement of the victim girl not yet recorded and the investigation is at the preliminary stage. Thereafter, the petitioner moved a bail application before this Court in Crl.O.P.No. 9099 of 2021. When the case was taken up for hearing, it was reported that the victim girl tested positive for Covid-19 and hence delay in recording 164 Cr.P.C. statement. Later, on 22.06.2021, the bail application was dismissed as withdrawn. Subsequently, the petitioner filed statutory bail application in Crl.M.P.No. 562 of 2021 under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C since charge sheet was not filed even after expiry of 60 days. Alteration report filed on 25.06.2021 which is on 62nd day. However, the same was dismissed for the reason, offence committed involves Section 6 of POCSO as per 164 Cr.P.C., statement received on 18.06.2021. Thereafter, the petitioner filed second statutory bail application in Crl.MP.SR.No. 337 of 2021 on 22.07.2021, the same was not entertained and returned for the reason that only 89 days completed as on 22.07.2021.

5. In this case, alteration report was filed after filing of the first statutory bail application. The Lower Court relied on the judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan, wherein it was held that the Court has to apply its mind at every stage from remand till framing of charges. Further, the power of Court is very wide to determine, as to whether the report to be

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top