Madras High CourtCRL OP/19203/2021dismissed

L.Alagappan v. State Through

2021-10-08Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Eighth day of October Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.19203 of 2021 1 L.ALAGAPPAN [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED ] 2 MANGAIYARKARASI Vs STATE THROUGH [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, W-27, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

CR.NO.UNKNOWN OF 2021.

For Petitioner : M/S.S.UTHUMANALI, Advocate For Respondent : M/S.C.E.PRATAP, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervener : M/S.J.FRANKLIN, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Section 498A, 406, 506(i) of Indian Penal Code and other Sections in Cr.No.Unknown of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners are inlaws of the defacto complainant. The petitioners' son/A1 was already married and had three children. Suppressing the earlier marriage, A-1 made an advertisement in the matrimonial site with the help of petitioners/A-2 and A-3 and married the defacto complainant and thereafter demanded dowry. Hence, the law enforcing agency registered a case against the petitioners.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, the learned counsel prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl side) submits that petitioners' have suppressed the earlier marriage of A-1 and arranged for another marriage with defacto complainant. The defacto complainant came to know the fact, she made a complaint and the investigation is pending. He further submits that this Court dismissed the petitioners' earlier anticipatory bail application vide order dated 02.09.2021 in Crl.OP.No.15898 of 2021. He vehemently opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Considering the fact that the petitioners have suppressed the earlier marriage of A-1 and have spoiled the life of the defacto complainant by entering into marriage with the defacto complainant and upon perusing the photos and documents of the earlier marriage of the petitioner/A-1 produced by the learned counsel of the intervenor and there is no change of circumstances after the dismissal of the petitioners' earlier anticipatory bail petition, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 08/10/2021 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 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, W-27, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S. S.UTHUMANALI Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.19203/2021 Date :08/10/2021 TA-27/10/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/