Rajclinton v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 18.12.2022 for the alleged offence under Section Women Missing and subsequently it was altered into Sections 366 and 506(i) of I.P.C. in Crime No.324 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that mother of victim arranged a marriage and a betrothal function was scheduled to be held on 27.11.2022 and on 05.12.2022, when a victim went to a beauty parlour at 12.00 noon, but she did not return. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that both victim and petitioner had a love affair, thereby she eloped with him on her own consent. He would submit that there is no specific overtact attributed against the petitioner and he is an innocent person and he has not at all

committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police. He would submit that he is no way connected with the occurrence and he will abide by any condition that may be imposed by this court. He would further submit that the investigation is almost completed and that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration from 18.12.2022. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that the petitioner was already married and on the date of betrothal, she came to know the same. However, mother of victim arranged a marriage and a betrothal function was scheduled to be held on 27.11.2022 and on 05.12.2022, when a victim went to a beauty parlour at 12.00 noon, but she did not return, based on which, F.I.R. was lodged under Sec.Women Missing and subsequently on 17.12.2022, the petitioner along with victim came to police station and on enquiry, they informed that the petitioner abducted her and wrongfully confined her in a house at Ambattur and had a forcible intercourse and also threatened to kill her. Accordingly, sections were altered. He would submit that if he is released on bail, he

would tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation and the investigation is not yet completed. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by both counsel and also considering gravity of offence committed by the petitioner, he is a married man and forcibly abducted victim girl and threatened her with dire consequences, and if he is released on bail, there is possibility of tampering the witnesses and hampering the investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 27.01.2023 rpp

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

rpp 27.01.2023