Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/13908/2020dismissed

Yuvanraj v. The Inspector Of Police

2020-12-03Honourable Mr Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 03/12/2020 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Yuvanraj ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Thogamalai Police Station, Karur District.

(Crime No.548 of 2020).

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.S.Vinayak, Advocate.

For Respondent : Ms.Ananthadevi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For an Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 548 of 2020 on the file of the Respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/sole accused , who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 306 of IPC seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the deceased aged about 22 years fell in love with the petitioner and on the pretext of marriage he also had physical relationship with the deceased, due to which she got pregnant and the same was also informed to the first accused. Further it is alleged that the accused promised that he will marry the victim if the pregnancy is aborted, for which the petitioner purchased pills and gave to the deceased. Hence she consumed the pills on 22.11.2020 and the pregnancy got aborted. The accused persons also ensured that he will marry the deceased . While being so, on 26.11.2020 the petitioner herein refused , due to which the deceased got humiliated and poured kerosene on her and set ablaze. Hence the complaint.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner fell in love with the victim girl and the same was 1/3

objected by her family and even then the petitioner is ready to marry the deceased and she only objected for marriage. He further submitted that the there was no suicide note by the deceased and as such the petitioner did not abet the deceased to commit suicide and he is no responsible for her suicide. Hence he seeks anticipatory bail

5. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) submitted that the petitioner has committed a very heinous offence and he only administered pills to the deceased to abort her pregnancy and he promised to marry her after abortion. Hence the deceased consumed pills and the pregnancy was aborted and thereafter the petitioner refused to marry her. Due to which the deceased got humiliated and set her ablaze by pouring kerosene on her. He would further submit that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required and opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. It is seen that the petitioner is a sole accused and he fell in love with the deceased, aged about 22 years. Due to their love affair they had physical relationship and the deceased got pregnant. It was informed to her father and thereafter the petitioner promised that if the deceased aborts her pregnancy he will marry her and accordingly the petitioner purchased some pills and administered the same to the deceased and after abortion the petitioner refused to marry the deceased. Thereafter due to humiliation the deceased poured kerosene on her and set her ablaze. It is also seen that for the past two years the deceased requested the petitioner to marry her for the reason that she got pregnant due to their physical relationship and even after abortion the petitioner refused to marry the deceased. Only because of the attitude of the petitioner, the deceased committed suicide. Therefore custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required, hence this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. In the result, the petition stands dismissed. sd/- 03/12/2020 / TRUE COPY / / /2020 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

2/3

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THOGAMALAI POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.13908 of 2020 Date :03/12/2020 AAV JM/PN/SAR II/08.12.2020/3P/3C 3/3