P.Kailayamoorthy v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Third day of September Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.16007 of 2021 P.KALIYAMOORTHY [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KEELAIYUR POLICE STATION, NAGAPATTINAM.

(CR NO.506/2021) For Petitioner : M/S.TN.BUVANESWARAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.C.E.PRATAP, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under sections 294(b), 448, 323, 506(2), 379 of I.P.C Section 4 of Women Harassment Act in Cr.No.506 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the brother-in-law of the defacto complainant and there was a family dispute between the families of the petitioner and defacto complainant and the defacto complainant had gone over to the house of the petitioner where a wordy quarrel arose between the wife of the petitioner and the defacto complainant and during the quarrel, the petitioner had snatched the thali chain of the defacto complainant and had not returned the same to her. Hence the defacto complainant lodged a compliant against the petitioner.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence he prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the investigation is pending in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is the brother-in-law of the defacto complainant and the matter is purely a family dispute between the petitioner and the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

defacto complainant. He further submitted that the thali chain has not yet received from the petitioner. He strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the thali chain is yet to be recovered, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this point of time. Accordingly this petition filed seeking anticipatory bail stands dismissed.

-sd/- 03/09/2021 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, KEELAIYUR POLICE STATION, NAGAPATTINAM.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.TN.BUVANESWARAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.16007/2021 Date :03/09/2021 CSK 14/09/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/