Prabhakaran v. The State Rep By

P.DHANABAL, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 376 of IPC in Crime No.25 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that petitioner and the defacto complainant fell in love with each other and had a physical relationship. When the defacto complainant asked him to marry her, he refused to marry. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and a false case has been foisted against him. Therefore, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) would submit that the petitioner was in love with defacto complainant and had physical relationship and thereafter, refused to marry her. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Mr.Karthikeyan, learned counsel represented for the Intervener would submit that he is going to file Intervening Petition. But, so far, no Intervening Petition is filed, hence, his request is rejected.

7. Considering the rival submissions on either side and considering the gravity of the offences charged against the petitioner and also taking into account that the investigation is not yet completed, this Court is declined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 28.12.2023 nr/rkp

P.DHANABAL,J nr/rkp 28.12.2023