This petition is filed by the petitioner under Section

438 of Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail in the event of his

arrest in Crime No.81/2022 of Subramanya Police Station,

registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341,

376, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

2. The brief factual matrix leading to the case are

that the victim child is the daughter of the complainant

and

the

complainant

has

lodged

a

complaint

on

21.08.2022 at 7.00 p.m. The allegations of the prosecution

3

disclose that on 11.01.2022 the victim girl had been to the

house of her grandmother and in night hours she stayed in

the house of accused No.1. It is also alleged that

thereafter accused No.1 raped her having knowledge that

the victim is a minor child and he has also threatened her

and later on, when they were returning in a bus, he

threatened the victim to disclose the name of one Annu @

Sathisha to be implicated on the ground of rape. When

they got down from the bus again the present petitioner

and other four persons also came there, wrongfully

restrained her and threatened her that she should disclose

the name of one Sathisha as the person who is cause for

her rape and the victim was threatened and as such she

did not disclose this aspect to anybody. Later on, she

disclosed this aspect before her father and as such her

father has lodged a complaint.

3. Apprehending his arrest the petitioner who is

arrayed as accused No.2 has approached the learned

Sessions Judge and learned Sessions Judge has rejected

the bail petition. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

4

4. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and

learned

HCGP

for

respondent-State.

Though

the

respondent No.2 is served he did not appear.

5. Having heard the arguments and perusing the

records, it is evident from the records that the victim is

aged about 14 years. Further, there are serious allegations

that she was raped by accused No.1. Her 164 Cr.P.C

Statement was also recorded before the Magistrate

wherein she has narrated the incident in detail regarding

accused No.1 raping her and later on threatening her to

put the blame on one Sathisha. Her further statement also

disclose that later on the present petitioner and other

accused persons also wrongfully restraining her and

threatening her that she should disclose the name of one

Sathisha for having cause for her rape.

6. Looking to these aspects, it is evident that the

present petitioner had knowledge of the incident of rape

said to have been committed by accused No.1. However,

5

he has again threatened her and want to protect the

accused No.1 by putting the blame on Sathisha. He is

absconding all along and now he is seeking discretionary

relief of anticipatory bail.

7. Looking to these facts and circumstances,

question of entertaining anticipatory bail of petitioner does

not arise at all as equity does not lie in favour of him. His

remedy is to surrender before the concerned Special Court

and then move for regular bail petition. It is contended

that his custodial interrogation is not required but that is

required to be decided by the Investigating Agency and not

by the petitioner. Hence, the petition being devoid of any

merits does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the

petition stands dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

VS