DINESH KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 7/10/2022 for the offences punishable under Ss. 366 of IPC r/w Sec. 3 and 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 in Crime No.265 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant and her husband are residing at Mumbai. They have two children, both the children are residing at Salem in their grand mother's home. While so, the defacto complainant and her husband arrived to their native place on 18/8/2022, where the defacto complainant, who is the mother of the minor girl, found her daughter missing. Hence, the case.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the minor girl, who was longing for love since her parents had left out her to the care of her grand mother, had forced the petitioner to take her away to some other place. Hence, the petitioner had travelled with her from Salem to Chennai. During that time, in terms of friendly manner, the petitioner had touched the victim girl. Other than this, no other allegation is against the petitioner as if he had committed penetrative sexual assault on her. He would submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.