BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT (Criminal Jurisdiction) Friday, the Eleventh day of November Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S.NAGAMUTHU CRL OP(MD)No.14385 of 2011 RAJENDRAN :PETITIONER / ACCUSED -Vs- THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, NANGUNERI, TIRUNELVELI DT. (CR.NO.NOT KNOWN OF 2011) :RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. D.VENKATESH Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.S.DURAIPANDIAN, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 Cr.P.C. ORDER:The Court Made the following order:- Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police in Crime No.Not known, for offences under sections 376 and 417 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner is now before this court seeking Anticipatory Bail. 2.According to the case of the prosecution, the petitioner had earlier fallen in love with the de facto complainant, who is aged around 18 years He promised to marry her. On several occasions, he had sexual intercourse with the de facto complainant. Therefore, her parents started arranging for her marriage with some one else. Accordingly, she was given in marriage to one Mr.Saravanan. After the said marriage, the petitioner did not stop his illegal activities. The petitioner threatening that he would divulge the relationship between them had sexual intercourse with her. He also claimed that he is her husband. Because of the same, she became pregnant. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would deny the above allegations. He would submit that of course there was a love affair between the petitioner and the de facto complainant. Since it was opposed and his parents did not agree for their marriage, the petitioner stopped the love affairs. Thereafter, the de facto complainant was given in marriage to the said Mr.Saravanan. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, after the love affairs between the petitioner and the de facto complainant came to light, the husband of the de facto complainant deserted her. 4.I have considered the above submissions. Now, the question is regarding the fate of the child, who is in the womb of her mother. The petitioner disowns paternity to the child. The husband of the de facto complainant has also deserted her. Now, the child is going to be born without knowing as to who is his/her father. If the allegation made as against the petitioner that he had sexual intercourse on the promise of marriage is true, surely, the offences said to have been committed by him are grave. In any event, the life of the de facto complainant has been now spoiled. Apart from the above, the future of the child is also getting spoiled. Thus, the offences said to have been committed by the petitioner are grave in nature. Since there is a very strong case made against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to him. Therefore, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 11/11/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO:1.The Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 2.The Inspector of Police,All Women Police Station,Nanguneri,Tirunelveli Dt. RP/16.11.2011/1P/3C. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.14385 of 2011,Date:11/11/2011. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/