ORDER

The petition has been filed by the defacto complainant in

Crime No. 555 of 2023 seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the first, second and third respondents/accused by order dated 04.09.2023 in C.M.P.No. 2659 of 2023 by the learned Principal Sessions

Judge at Salem.

2. Even before narrating the facts which led to the lodging of the complaint and registration of FIR in Crime No. 555 of 2023, a few background facts will have to be stated:

3. Originally, FIR in Cr.No. 31 of 2018 had been registered by All Women Police Station, Omalur on 31.12.2018 under Sections 363

and 366 of IPC and Section 5(i) and 6 of Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 on a complaint given by the mother of the petitioner herein against the first respondent.

4. In the said complaint, it had been stated that the petitioner herein had been kidnapped by the first respondent and when enquired proper information was not given. The complaint was lodged which led to registration of FIR in Cr.No. 31 of 2018. After investigation was conducted, final report was filed and it was originally taken cognizance as Special S.C.No. 38 of 2019 and subsequently renumbered as Special S.C.No. 237 of 2019 by the Special Court for Trial of Cases in POSCO

Act, Salem.

5. The matter went to trial and Judgment was delivered on

20.08.2020 whereby the first respondent was convicted of offences under Section 363 and 366 of IPC and under Section 6 of POSCO Act and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of four years and fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default, three months simple imprisonment for offence under Section 363 IPC and for four years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default six months simple imprisonment for offence under Section 366 IPC and for 10 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.50,000/- in default two years simple imprisonment for offence under Section 6 of POSCO Act. The total fine amount was determined at

Rs.65,000/-.

6. The Judgment had been delivered after examining and analysing the evidence produced on behalf of the prosecution in which the mother of the petitioner herein was examined as PW-1 and the petitioner herein, the victim child, was examined as PW-2. There were also six other witness including the medical doctors, PW-6 & 7 and the Inspector of Police PW-8. The prosecution also produced Exs. P-1 to P- 21 which included the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., of the victim child as Ex.P-3. The educational certificate of the victim child was narjed as Ex.P-71 to determine her age, the medical examination report was marked as Ex.P-13, the forensic Laboratories report were marked as Exs. P-14 and P-15 and the FIR as Ex.P-17.

7. The accused/ first respondent herein did not examine any witness nor did he produce any material objects.

8. As stated, on analysis of the materials available, including oral and documentary evidence, the first respondent had been convicted for offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 IPC and Section 6 of

POSCO Act and was sentenced accordingly.

9. To narrate the sequence of events, it is informed that the first respondent had filed Crl.A.No. 349 of 2020 before this Court and

Judgment was delivered on 25.08.2021.

10. The one factor which had weighed on the mind of the learned Single Judge was that after the order of conviction, the petitioner herein, who had attained the age of majority and the first respondent, who was the accused in FIR in Cr.No. 31 of 2018 had married each other. Considering this particular aspect though the order of conviction was sustained by the learned Single Judge in the Criminal Appeal, the sentence alone was interfered with and reduced from 10 years to 7 years rigorous imprisonment.

11. Thereafter, the first respondent had filed a further appeal against the order of conviction before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and I am informed that the said Appeal is still pending but exemption had been granted to the first respondent from surrendering.

12. When the matter