Single judge dismissed a criminal bail petition filed by an accused alleged to have trespassed and attempted to outrage the modesty of a woman under Sections 324, 354(A), 354(B), and 452 of the IPC.
Bail was refused and the bail petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO
CRL.P.No.11251 of 2013
ORDER
The petitioner is accused in Cr.No.87 of 2013 on the file of the Peddathumbalam, Adoni Mandal, Kurnool District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 354(A)(2), 354 (B) & 452 IPC.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State.
The accusation levelled against the petitioner is that he trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and attempted to outrage her modesty.
The allegations mentioned in the First Information Report prima facie disclose the commission of offence by the petitioner. The investigation in this case is in progress.
Having regard to the nature of the offence, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Hence, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
R.KANTHA RAO,J
7th October, 2013 rkk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a criminal proceeding alleging outraging modesty and trespassing.
Whether the nature of the offence warrants refusal of bail at the bail pending inquiry stage.
4 provisions across 1 enactments
The Petitioner
State
R. KANTA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
