L.Alagappan v. State Through

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twenty Fourth day of November Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.21530 of 2021 1 L.ALAGAPPAN [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED ] 2 MANGAIYARKARASI Vs STATE THROUGH [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, W-27, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

IN CRIME NO. 7 OF 2021.

For Petitioner : M/S. M.GNANASEKAR Advocate For Respondent : MR. S.BALAJI, 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 498(A), 406, 506(i) of Indian Penal Code and other Sections in Cr.No.7 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners/A-2 and A3 are in-laws of the defacto complainant. A-1 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.

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

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.

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. Coming to know of the same, the defacto complainant made a complaint. He further submits that already this Court has dismissed the anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioners in Crl.O.P.No.15898 of 2021 dated 02.09.2021 and this is the second bail petition. Hence, he vehemently opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate and the counsel for Intervener and also considering that this Court has already dismissed the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioners and there is no change of circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 24/11/2021 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.

+1 CC to M/S. M.GNANASEKAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.13475 +1 CC to M/S.J.FRANKLIN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.13434 CRL OP.21530/2021 Date :24/11/2021 RW 07/12/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/