Sasikala v. The State Rep By Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Seventeenth day of June Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.14075 of 2022 SASIKALA [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KANNAGI NAGAR POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

(CRIME NO.205 OF 2022) For Petitioner : M/S.C.PRABAKARAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.DAMODARAN, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 366(a) of I.P.C., and Section 6 of POCSO Act in Crime No.205 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant's daughter one Rajeshwari had left the house without any intimation and she did not return for the past two years. On 03.05.2022 the said Rajeshwari returned to her mother's house and informed that she had love affair with A1/Karthik. Further she informed that she have got married with him during the year 2021. while that being so, the petitioner and her son-A1 harrased and gave abortion tablet. Hence, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent Police.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that due to Covid-19 pandemic restrictions, she had not moved anywhere from his residence and did not assist for the marriage. Further submitted that https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

petitioner name also not found in the F.I.R., and the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on the ground that based on the Statement of record, petitioner is the mother of A1 and she gave abortion tablet to the de-facto complainant's daughter to abort the child on three occasions.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of the fact that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required in this case and the petitioner had committed very heinous offence. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. -sd/- 17/06/2022 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, KANNAGI NAGAR POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.C.PRABAKARAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.14075/2022 Date :17/06/2022 CSK 01/07/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/