Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/8998/2024dismissed

Athilakshmi v. The Inspector Of Police

2024-06-20Honourable Mr Justice B.Pugalendhi3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20.06.2024 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice B.PUGALENDHI

1. Athilakshmi

2. Balamurugan

3. Sobanadevi ... Petitioners/Accused 2 to 4

Versus

State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Sattur, Virudhunagar District.

Cr.No.19/2024 ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners: Mr.P.Saravanakumar Advocate For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottaichmay Government Advocate (Crl. side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C. PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.19 of 2024 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent Police, in 1/3

connection with a case in Crime No.19 of 2024, for the offence under Sections 417, 376, 294(b), 506(i) IPC and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, have filed this petition seeking anticipatory bail.

2. The petitioners/A2 to A4 are parents and sister of the first accused. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant and the first accused loved each other and on 11.05.2024, at about 11.00 a.m., the defacto complainant went to the house of the first accused. At that time, he was alone in his house and by giving false promise to marry her, he had sexual intercourse with her and subsequent to that, she was pregnant. On knowing the same, the defacto complainant, on 08.06.2024, went to the first accused's house and told the petitioners about her pregnancy that the first accused was responsible for her pregnancy. But, the petitioners abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and also threatened her with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submits that when the defacto complainant came to the house of the petitioners, they advised her to discuss the matter with the first accused as it was a personal issue between the two consenting adults. He further submits that the first accused assured the defacto complainant that he would marry her after three 2/3

months. However, the defacto complainant has filed the complaint.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that now, the defacto complainant is carrying two months pregnancy.

5. Considering the nature of offence and also considering the fact that the defacto complainant is now carrying two months pregnancy, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 20/06/2024 / TRUE COPY / 05/07/2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

OGY TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, SATTUR, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

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

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.8998 of 2024 Date :20/06/2024 SA/GS/SAR. /05.07.2024/3P/3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023. 3/3