Back
RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
Srungapati Suseel Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Ravi Cheemalapati, J. - This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.'), seeking anticipatory bail, by the petitioner/sole accused in Cr. No. 81 of 2022 of Maharanipeta Police Station, Vishakhapatnam registered for the offence punishable under Sections 417, 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC').
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that accused made false promises to defacto complainant that he loves her, intends to marry her and induced her into a physical relationship, which would amount to cheating and rape under Sections 417, 376 IPC. Hence, the above crime was registered against the petitioner.
3. Heard Sri Ramachandra Rao Gurram, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration, contended that the petitioner/Accused was falsely implicated in the present crime and reading of the entire complaint it appears that it is totally with the consent of a complainant and it is nothing but a consensus sex. Hence, Section 376 of IPC does not attract. Learned counsel for the petitioner
The consensual nature of a relationship and the potential impact of granting anticipatory bail on the investigation were central to the court's decision.
The court's decision was based on the consideration that the offences were not punishable with death or imprisonment for life, and the conditions imposed to address the apprehension of absconding or ....
Breach of promise of marriage does not attract the offense of cheating under Sections 417 and 420 of the IPC.
The seriousness of the offence and prima facie evidence from the FIR are crucial factors in deciding on anticipatory bail.
Anticipatory bail is not a right and should only be granted in exceptional circumstances, particularly in serious allegations where custodial interrogation is necessary to protect the investigation.
The court has the discretion to grant anticipatory bail based on the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
Anticipatory bail is not granted when specific allegations exist against the accused, necessitating custodial interrogation.
Prima facie evidence of misrepresentation and dupe influencing the denial of anticipatory bail.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
