Sathiyaraj v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twelfth day of August Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.14116 of 2021 SATHIYARAJ [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, CHEYYAR, TIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT (CRIME NO.3/2020) For Petitioner : M/S G.MAGESHKUMAR Advocate For Respondent : M/S. C.E.PRATAP, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections Sections 417, 376 and 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.3 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.

The case of the prosecution as per the de facto complainant Raseetha is that the petitioner, on the false promise to marry her, had sexual intercourse with her on several occasions. Thereafter, he had blocked her phone number. The de facto complainant had given a complaint to important persons in the village and when they enquired him, he had agreed to marry her. While so, on 01.04.2020, the de facto complainant was called by the parents of the accused Sathiyaraj and when she had gone to their house, the parents of the petitioner had criminally intimidated her by saying that marriage was fixed for Sathiyaraj with one Narmadha and she should not cause trouble. 3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submit that the petitioner had not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner, on the false assurance of marrying the de facto complainant, had sexual intercourse with her and thereafter, cheated her. He would submit that the parents of the petitioner had threatened the de facto complainant. He further submits that this Court had already dismissed the anticipatory bail application for the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.20395 of 2020 on 21.01.2021.

5. Considering the nature of offence committed by the petitioner and this Court had already dismissed the anticipatory bail application for the petitioner and there is no change in circumstances, , this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 12/08/2021 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, CHEYYAR, TIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S G.MAGESHKUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.14116/2021 Date :12/08/2021 APN 31/08/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/