Vinayagam v. State Re By

Crl.O.P.No.17965 of 2022 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The petitioner, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 341, 354, 355, 306 IPC r/w. Sec.4(B)(1) of Women Harassment Act in Crime No. 137 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. There are totally two accused in this case, in which the petitioner is arrayed as A1. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is alleged to have misbehaved with the victim girl, who aged about 18 years and molested her, when she went outside for toilet. Due to which, the victim girl committed suicide. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The coaccused was granted bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.14988 of 2022. Hence, he prays to anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the specific overt act against the petitioner is that he used to harass the deceased while she uses toilet. He would further submit that already this https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

Anu Court had dismissed the anticipatory bail petition and this is the second anticipatory bail petition. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and that the earlier anticipatory bail petition was dismissed by this Court, there is no change of circumstances to consider the second anticipatory bail petition. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 03.08.2022 Anu Crl.O.P.No.17965 of 2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis