X Vs. Y

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No. 3 of 2013 on the file of the Respondent-Police registered for offences under Sections 417, 420 & 506(i) of IPC. Apprehending arrest at the hands of the Respondent-Police in connection with the said case, he is now before this Court with this Petition seeking Anticipatory Bail. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: The de facto Complainant claims to be a Cinema Actress aged 30 years. According to her, the Petitioner got himself introduced to her as a financier in Cine field. After such introduction, the Petitioner used to visit the de facto Complainant frequently. During one such visit, he represented to the de facto Complainant that he was preparing to shoot a new film by engaging the de facto Complainant as heroine. On that pretext, he also paid a sum of ' 10,000/- initially as advance to her towards her remuneration. Thereafter, the Petitioner frequented his visits to the house of the de facto Complainant. Slowly, he started impressing upon the de facto Complainant that he would marry her. On that representation, he made sexual overtures towards the de facto Complainant. She also yielded for the same and allowed him to have sexual intercourse with her. It is further alleged that from the year 2008 onwards, for a period of four years, they were living under a common roof as husband and wife in 'live in relationship'. It is also stated that during the year 2008, due to the sexual intercourse she had with the Petitioner, she conceived. Thereafter, when the de facto Complainant insisted for marriage, the Petitioner told her that he was incurring huge loss in his business and to recover from the same, he was in need of Rs. 12.00 lakhs. Accordingly, during the year 2008-09, he initially received a sum of Rs. 12.00 lakhs and subsequently, a sum of Rs. 8.50 lakhs from her. In the mean while, she aborted the pregnancy on 18.01.2009. While receiving the above said amount, it is further alleged that the Petitioner promised to repay the same with interest, but, he did not do so. Finally, the Petitioner executed a document in favour of the de facto Complainant thereby promising to repay the amount with interest at the rate of 24% per annum. After some time, he stopped visiting the de facto Complainant. From her enquiries, she came to know that the Petitioner was already married and he had also sexually exploited several girls. It is also alleged that while having sexual intercourse with the de facto Complainant, the Petitioner videographed the same and when the de facto Complainant questioned the same, the Petitioner did not have any reason to state. She has further alleged that the Petitioner had sexual intercourse with a number of ladies ranging from young girls to old ladies and cheated them all.

(2.) The said written information was directly presented to the Commissioner of Police, Chennai City, on 22.11.2013 and the same was forwarded by the Commissioner to the Respondent-Police on 03.12.2013. Accordingly, the case was registered on 03.12.2013 at 04.00 p.m.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the Petitioner would dispute the above allegations. He would submit that on 19.01.2014, the de facto Complainant issued a legal Notice through her Counsel to the Petitioner wherein, she has stated that the Petitioner had borrowed a sum of Rs. 15.00 lakhs during September, 2008 from the de facto Complainant for his business purpose. In the said Notice, she has further stated that subsequently she paid a sum of 78.00 lakhs to the Petitioner. It is also stated that on 05.04.2010, the Petitioner executed a document in favour of the de facto Complainant thereby promising to repay the said amount with interest at 24% p.a. In the said Notice, in Para 3 it is further stated as follows: