Muhammed Sabfiq v. The State Rep By Its,

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 506 (ii) IPC r/w 4 of TNPHW Act in Cr.No.307 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner promised the defacto complainant that he would marry her and had sexual relationship and cheated her. Based on which, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner along with other accused threatened the defacto complainant to withdraw the complaint. Hence, the case.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the defacto complainant/victim on her own volition had physical contact with the petitioner. Hence prays for grant of anticipatory

bail.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that earlier, a complaint had been lodged by the defacto complainant against the petitioner and to withdraw the said complaint, the petitioner herein threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences. He would submit that the petitioner is the main accused in this case and if he is granted anticipatory bail, he would tamper the witness. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Mr.A.L.Franc Paul, learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant/Intervenor would submit that based on the first complaint, the respondent conducted a preliminary enquiry and registered F.I.R in Cr.No.307 of 2022 against the petitioner. and that a Sessions case is pending before the Mahil Court at Coimbatore in S.C.No.47 of 2022. While so, the petitioner herein along with other accused threatened the defacto complainant to withdraw the complaint. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the gravity of offence committed by the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that if he is released on anticipatory bail, he would tamper the witness. Therefore, this case requires a detailed investigation and this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 07.12.2022 anu

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

anu 07.12.2022 (1/2)