Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Jannaikillaka Dileepu Kumar vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 20 October, 2021
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5714 of 2021
ORDER:-
This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") seeking pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/accused in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.115 of 2021 of Komarada Police Station, Vizianagaram District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 417 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. The case of prosecution is that a report was lodged wherein it was alleged that the complainant is working as a medical lab technician at PHC, Duddukallu for the past one year and she got acquaintance with petitioner who is working as attender in RDO Office, Parvathipuram since five years back. It was alleged that on the promise of marrying the complainant, petitioner had sexual intercourse with her for several times and he has been postponing the marriage from the last three years. The petitioner finally denied to marry the complainant. Basing on the said report, the present crime is registered.
3. Heard Sri P.Rajasekhar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is falsely implicated in the crime due to rivalry between the parties and petitioner is nothing to do with the alleged offence. He placed reliance on a decision reported in Dr.Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar 2 v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.1 and submitted that acknowledged consensual physical relationship between parties would not constitute an offence under Section 376 of IPC. He submits that in the present case sexual intercourse took place between petitioner and complainant with complainant's consent, as such the ingredients of either Section 376 or 417 of IPC have no application. He further submits that investigation might have been completed except filing charge sheet and the petitioner is ready to cooperate with investigation. Hence, petitioner's case may be considered for grant of pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that 10 witnesses are examined and investigation is pending, as such petitioner is not entitled for pre-arrest bail at this stage.
6. Taking into consideration that there was acknowledged consensual physical relationship between parties and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Dr.Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar's case (referred supra), this Court deems it appropriate to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. The petitioner/accused shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No. 115 of 2021 of Komarada Police Station, Vizianagaram District on condition of executing self bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two 1 AIR 2019 SC 327 3 sureties for a likesum each to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer, Komarada Police Station, Vizianagaram District.
Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J Date :20.10.2021 IKN 4 THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI Allowed anticipatory CRIMINAL PETITION No.5714 of 2021 20.10.2021 IKN