Harish Babu @ Karikalan v. State Rep. By

Crl.O.P.No.6296 of 2016 K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.

The petitioner, who is the sole accused, was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.02.2016 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 366(A), 324, 506(ii) of IPC @ Sections 366(A), 324, 506(ii) of IPC r/w Sections 5(1) and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,2012. 2.The case of the prosecution is that on 08.11.2015, the accused had gone to the house of the defacto complainant and after attacking the defacto complainant, had forcibly taken her daughter, who is aged about 17 years.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that it is a case of love affair and the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate [Criminal Side] appearing for the respondent vehemently opposed the bail petition by stating that the petitioner has involved in 10 previous cases for the offences under Sections 392, 394, 395, 397, 379 and 307 of IPC.

5. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

rrg 28.03.2016

K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.

rrg Crl.O.P.No.6296 of 2016 28.03.2016