The victim's unsustained testimony is crucial in bail considerations under sexual offence charges.

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

03.02.2026 for the alleged offences under Section 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, in Crime No.29 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. This is a case of sexual harassment as defined under Section 11 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are false and that the petitioner has been in custody since 03.02.2026. He would further submit that, in any event, further custodial interrogation is not required for the purpose of investigation. Hence, he prayed for the grant of bail.

4. At this juncture, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Puducherry)

fairly submitted that the victim girl, while deposing before the learned Magistrate under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, has not supported the prosecution case.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

6. In view of the above submission made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) and upon perusing the statement given by the victim girl before the learned Magistrate on 20.02.2026, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, subject to certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on their 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 the learned Fast Track Court Exclusively to deal with offences under the POCSO Act, Puducherry. and subject to the following conditions:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] on breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions had been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court itself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs.

State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];

[f] if the petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

04.03.2026 skr Note:

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To

1. The learned Fast Track Court Exclusively to deal with offences under the POCSO Act, Puducherry.

2. The Superintendent, Kalapet Prison, Pondicherry.

3. The Station House Officer, Ariyankuppam Police Station, Pondicherry.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras C.KUMARAPPAN,J.

skr

04.03.2026