Madras High CourtCRL OP/12803/2021dismissed

Nayagam v. State Rep.By

2021-08-04Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Fourth day of August Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.12803 of 2021 1 NAYAGAM [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] 2 MARY 3 JAYASEELAN Vs STATE REP.BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, ULUNDURPET, VILLUPURAM DISTRICT.

CRIME NO.16 OF 2021.

For Petitioner : M/S. D.BENNINGTON Advocate For Respondent : THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 450, 417, 376, 312, 294(b), 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.16 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that A1 and the defacto complainant loved each other and the first accused had sexual intercourse with the defacto complainant on the promise that he would marry her. Subsequently, the victim has become pregnant and thereafter, A1 had given Papaya fruit to the defacto complainant and aborted the child and refused to marry her. Hence, a case has been registered against the petitioners.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have 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 petitioners. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that the first and second petitioners are the father and mother of A1, third petitioner is the brother of A1. He further submits that the petitioners had abused the defaco complainant in filthy language and accompanied with A1. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. This Court had perused the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. which reveals that the victim, on her own volition, she went along with A1 and A1 had sexual intercourse with her, the petitioners have abused in filthy language and tried to attacked her.

6.Considering the fact that the petitioners have involved in very serious offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 04/08/2021 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, ULUNDURPET, VILLUPURAM DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S. D.BENNINGTON Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.12803/2021 Date :04/08/2021 INBA 31/08/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/