COMMON ORDER

The complaint given by the second respondent in these criminal revision cases in Crime No.2 of 2020 on the file of the All Women Police Station, Saidapet, was investigated and a final report was filed proposing totally four accused guilty for the offences under Sections 417, 342, 365, 313, 375, 376, 509 and 506(i) of IPC r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.

2. The gist of allegations against the first accused is that by conducting an engagement, promising to marry the de-facto complainant, the first accused had physical intercourse and impregnated the de-facto complainant. Thereafter, when the de-facto complainant went back to Canada, the first accused, over phone pressurised her to come back otherwise threatening to cancel the wedding and with the help of his friend, the second accused administered pills to the de-facto complainant and aborted the foetus. The third accused being the mother of the first accused and the fourth accused being the brother of the first accused had not only joined hands with the first accused in the whole episode and have categorically refused to perform the marriage and also abused the de-

facto complainant.

3. The final report filed by the police is now taken on file as S.C.

No.98 of 2021 and is pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chennai. The second accused in the case, namely Keziah, the friend of the first accused had filed Crl.M.P. No.5752 of 2021 for discharge. The third accused, namely Geetha being the mother of the first accused, the fourth accused, namely Vivekanand being the brother of the first accused, filed Cr.M.P. No.5751 of 2021 for their discharge. The learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chennai, took up both the petitions and by a common order dated 28.09.2021, dismissed both the petitions for discharge. As against which the accused Nos.3 and 4 have filed Crl.R.C. Nos.740 of 2021 and the accused No.2 has filed Crl.R.C. No.748 of 2021 and as such both the revision cases were taken up together for arguments and are disposed of by this common order.

4. Heard Mr.Manoj Sreevalsan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) and Mr.V.K.Sathiyamoorthy, learned counsel counsel appearing for the second respondent/de-facto complainant in both the revisions and perused the materials available on record.

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners firstly making submissions on behalf of accused No.2, who is only a friend of the first accused submitted that at the outset, the offence under Sections 417, 376, etc. will not be made out as against the said petitioner and the only allegation is that she aided the first accused in aborting the foetus. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the only allegations in the final report filed by the police are:

(i) LW-1 has stated that at Ramachandra Hospital on

19.08.2019, the second accused was also present and she spoke to the de-facto complainant that if she continues the pregnancy, the first accused would abandon her and therefore, it is good for her to go for abortion;

(ii) Again LW-1 stated that in the flat where she was taken by the first accused, the second accused and her husband were there and both the first and second accused had threatened her and confined her in a room in the said flat belonging to the second accused from

19.08.2019 to 23.08.2019;

(iii) Again LW-1 had stated that upon threat she took the pills administered by the first and second accused and that they threatened and saw to that she ate all the pills;

(iv) LW-2, LW-3, LW-4 and LW-5 has repeated only the said statement as hearsay witnesses and therefore, there is nothing in their statements;

(v) LW-6 is again a hearsay witness, who says that the prosecutrix cried to her that the first accused and the second accused forcefully confined her in the room from 19.08.2019 to 23.08.2019 and aborted her pregnancy.

6. Citing the above allegations, the learned counsel wou