Sujin Raj v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Thirtieth day of April Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL OP(MD) No.6567 of 2019 SUJIN RAJ ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED NO.2 Vs THE STATE OF TAMILNADU, REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, MARTHANDAM, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT. RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : MR.M.MAHARAJA Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.SUYAMBULINGA BHARATHI, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Section girl missing @ 366 IPC and 5(i) 6 (i) of Pocso Act 2012 in Crime No.

17 of 2019 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is A2. The defacto complainant's daughter viz., Archana is working at Xerox shop and A1 used to visit the Xerox shop and induced the victim girl for love affairs. Thereafter, believing his words, she went along with A1 to his house as if A1 promised to marry the victim girl and agreed to sexual relationship. Thereafter, the brother of A1 forcibly had sexual intercourse with the victim girl. Thereafter, Akila/A3 and A2 joined together threatened the defacto complainant and A1 refused to marry the victim girl. Hence, the victim girl's father lodged a complaint before the respondent police. 3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for anticipatory bail. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.

4.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that 164 statement was recorded by the learned judicial Magistrate No.1, Kulithurai. 5.On perusal of the 164 statement, the petitioner and other accused persons committed a heinous offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed.

sd/- 30/04/2019 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, KULITHURAI.

2.DO THRO'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT AT NAGERCOIL.

3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, MARTHANDAM, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.6567 of 2019 Date :30/04/2019 AE/PN/SAR-I/ (08.05.2019) 2P 5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/