Arunkumar v. Inspector Of Police

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

The petitioner who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 506 & 509 of IPC in Crime No.Not known of 2024, on the file of the respondent Police seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the de-facto complainant worked for the same client, met each other, fell in love and got married on 30.07.2023 without the knowledge of their respective families. During February 2024, the defacto complainant revealed the marriage to her father and her family did not accept the marriage and the defacto complainant's family started making calls to the petitioner and threatened him to leave her. Under the undue influence of her family, the defacto complainant agreed for another engagement taking advantage of the marriage not being registered. Thereafter, the petitioner sent photos of them being together to the defacto complainant's father and after seeing the photos, the defacto complainant's father lodged a complaint. Hence, the complaint. 1/4

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner had love affair with the victim girl and subsequently, their parents were not accepted their marriage. For this, the parents of the defacto complainant has lodged a police complaint and therefore, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner by stating that the petitioner has posted the private photographs taken between the petitioner and the defacto complainant in the Instagram Platform. He further submitted that the petitioner with ulterior motive has posted the photographs in the online platform and he vehemently opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.Considering the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent that all the photographs which were taken privately personally were published in the Instagram, some of the photographs also shows the attitude of the petitioner that he would tamper the 2/4

evidence if anticipatory bail is granted. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 29.04.2024 krk 3/4

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

krk 29.04.2024 4/4