J.Mohammed Ashiq v. The State Rep.By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty Sixth day of October Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.19951 of 2021 J.MOHAMMED ASHIQ [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP.BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, FLOWER BAZAAR, CHENNAI -1.
(CR.NO.5 OF 2021) For Petitioner : M/S.K.MADHAN 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 apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Section 4 of the Tamilnadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 and Section 506(1) of IPC in Crime No.5 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had one side love with the de-facto complainant.
Further, when the parents of the de-facto complainant arranged her marriage with another person, the petitioner contacted the bridegroom and spoken ill of her character and sent the photos which he had taken with the de-facto complainant during his stay in her house, due to which, the marriage was cancelled. Thereafter, the petitioner also threatened the de-facto complainant and her family members with dire consequences. Hence, the law enforcing agency registered a case against the petitioner, based on the complaint lodged by the de-facto complainant. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the de -facto complainant had love affair and there is sufficient evidence to prove the said contention.
He further submitted that only the parents of the de-facto complainant forced her to give such a false complaint against the petitioner. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.
4.The learned Government Advocate would submit that this is the second anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner and this Court has already dismissed the earlier anticipatory bail application of the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.14789 of 2021 dated 06.09.2021. The petitioner in order to stop the marriage of the de-facto complainant with another person, contacted the bridegroom and sent the photos which he had taken with the de-facto complainant, due to which, the marriage was cancelled and the de-facto complainant and her family members were subjected to mental stress. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.Considering the gravity of offence and the earlier anticipatory bail petition was dismissed by this Court and there is no change of circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6.Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. -sd/- 26/10/2021 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, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, FLOWER BAZAAR, CHENNAI -1.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
CC to M/S.K.MADHAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.19951/2021 Date :26/10/2021 CSK 01/11/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/