Madras High Court

CRL OP(MD)/16982/2017 of NAGARAJ Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE on 28 December 2017

Cites 0, Cited by 0

BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Eighth day of December Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice S.VAIDYANATHAN CRL OP(MD) No.16982 of 2017 NAGARAJ ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.1 Vs THE STATE REP.BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT( Criminal Jurisdiction )

Thursday, the Twenty Eighth day of December Two Thousand SeventeenPRESENT

The Hon`ble Mr Justice S.VAIDYANATHAN

CRL OP(MD) No.16982 of 2017

NAGARAJ ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.1

Vs

THE STATE REP.BY,THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION,RAMNATHAPURAM DISTRICT, CR NO. 13/2017. ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT

For Petitioner : M/S.R.MURUGAN Advocate

For Respondent : MR.K.ANBARASAN 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 therespondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections376, 417, 506(i) of IPC in Crime No.13 of 2017 on the file of therespondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.Heard the learned counsel on either side.

3.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner used tosend obscene messages to the de facto complainant and he hadphysical contact with the de facto complainant forcibly and hence,she gave birth to a male child.

4.It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitionerthat the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committedany offence and prays for anticipatory bail in favour of thepetitioner.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that thepetitioner is the sole accused. He also submitted that due to theact of the petitioner, the de facto complainant gave birth to a malechild. He further submitted that investigation is still pending.

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case andhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/considering the serious of offence said to have been committed bythe petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, this Criminal Originalpetition is dismissed. sd/- 28/12/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO

1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, RAMNATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

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

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

ORDER

IN

CRL OP(MD) No.16982 of 2017

Date :28/12/2017

MKV-PM-PN-SAR 3/3.1.2018/2P-3C

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead