Madras High CourtCRL OP/17640/2021dismissed

Anoop v. The Inspector Of Police

2021-10-07Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Seventh day of October Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.17640 of 2021 ANOOP [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE [ RESPONDENT ] ERODE TALUK POLICE STATION, ERODE, ERODE DISTRICT (CRIME NO.362/2021) For Petitioner : M/S.S.MADHUSUDANAN Advocate For Respondent : MR. C.E.PRATAP, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervener : M/S.L.INFANT DINESH, 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 498(A), 406, 420 & 506(i) of IPC in Cr.No.362 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is arrayed as A1 in this case. The petitioner and the defacto complainant got married during the year 2010 and they have blessed with a female child. The couples were living separately for the past 4 years. The petitioner has refused to return back the jewels and other valuables to the defacto complainant and threatened her with dire consequences. Based on the complaint, the respondent police registered a case against the petitioner and other accused persons. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

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

4.The learned Government Advocate submitted that this is second anticipatory bail to the petitioner and earlier the petitioner filed anticipatory bail in Crl.OP.No.15569 of 2021 and the same was dismissed on 31.08.2021 before this Court. The allegation the petitioner is serious in nature. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. The learned counsel for the intervenor has seriously objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Considering the fact that the previous anticipatory bail petition was dismissed and there is no change of circumstances in this case, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7.Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. -sd/- 07/10/2021 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 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ERODE TALUK POLICE STATION, ERODE DISTRICT.

+1 CC to M/S.L.INFANT DINESH, Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.11196 CRL OP.17640/2021 Date :07/10/2021 RW 09/11/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/