Raj v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the First day of November Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.20547 of 2021 RAJ [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, VIRUDHACHALAM.

CRIME NO. 22/2021 For Petitioner : M/S.RAGHAVACHARI Senior Counsel for M/S. R.VEERAMANI Advocate For Respondent : MR. A.GOPINATH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.09.2021 for the offence punishable under Sections 417, 376 and 313 of IPC in Crime No.22 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the defacto complainant loved each other and the petitioner had sexual intercourse with the defacto complainant on the promise that he would marry her. Subsequently, the victim has become pregnant and thereafter, the petitioner had given some tablet to the defacto complainant and aborted the child and refused to marry her. Hence, a case has been registered against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioner has been in jail from 29.09.2021. He further submitted that one Sanjiv Gandhi, who is brother-in-law of the defacto complainant had sexual relationship with her, a false case has been foisted against the petitioner. He further submitted that the said Sanjiv Gandhi and his brother one Vasanthakumar were arrested in connection with the death of a girl by https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

name Subbulakshmi, while carrying out illegal abortion. A case has been registered against them in Crime No.696 of 2021, on the file of the Andimandam Police Station, at that time, the petitioner helped the victim girl family to secure justice, a false case has been given. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the petitioner was already married man and having two children. Further, the petitioner and the defacto complainant loved each other and the petitioner had sexual intercourse with the defacto complainant on the promise that he would marry her. Subsequently, the victim has become pregnant and thereafter, the petitioner had given some tablet to the defacto complainant and aborted the child and refused to marry her. He further submitted that the investigation is still pending. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that there is serious allegation made against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 01/11/2021 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 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, VIRUDHACHALAM.

2 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, SUB JAIL, VILLUPURAM.

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+1 CC to M/S R.VEERAMANI Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.12325 CRL OP.20547/2021 Date :01/11/2021 INBA-18/11/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/