V.Suresh v. The State Rep By Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Twenty Eighth day of January Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V. THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.742 of 2022 V.SURESH [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP. BY [ RESPONDENT ] INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, AVINASHI, TIRUPPUR DISTRICT.

CRIME NO.01 OF 2022 For Petitioner : M/S.M.GURUPRASAD Advocate for M/S.D.LAKSHMIPATHY Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.GOKULAKRISHNAN, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR For Intervenor : M/S.S.ARJUN Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 5(I) R/W. 6 of Protection of Child from Sexual Offences and 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.01 of 2022 on the file of the respondent seeks anticipatory bail.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner aged about 43 years married the defacto complainant aged about 23 years in the year 2018. It is alleged that the petitioner sexually harassed and assaulted the defacto complainant. It is further alleged that the petitioner threatened her that he will published her naked photographs in the social media. Hence, the complaint. 4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submits that the petitioner had filed O.P.Sr.No.4625 of 2021 for restitution of conjugal rights before the Family Court, Chennai. Hence, he seeks for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5. The learned Counsel appearing for the intervener raised his strong objections for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner stating that earlier, the petitioner had married three women. He further submits that the defacto complainant also harassed by him and he further placed the photographs showing the assault, injuries inflicted on the victim by the petitioner.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that, at the time time of marriage the victim girl is a minor and he further submits that the petitioner already married three women. He further submits that investigation is at initial stage. However, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to petitioner.

7. Considering the gravity of offence committed by the petitioner and also considering that if he is granted anticipatory bail, he may tamper the evidence, hence this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 28/01/2022 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, AVINASHI, TIRUPPUR DISTRICT 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to D.LAKSHMIPATHY Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.742/2022 Date :28/01/2022 MK:04/02/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/