Madras High CourtCRL OP/23220/2021dismissed

Chinnamaruthu Pandiyan @ Arun v. The State By

2021-12-06Honourable Mrs Justice T.V.Thamilselvi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Sixth day of December Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V. THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.23220 of 2021 CHINNAMARUTHU PANDIYAN @ ARUN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AWPS TIRUPPUR SOUTH, TIRUPPUR CITY.

(CRIME NO.6 OF 2021) For Petitioner : M/S.J.FRANKLIN Advocate For Respondent : MR.N.S.SUGANTHAN, Government 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 Sections 498(A), 406 and 494 of IPC in Crime No.6 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent police is that marriage has been held on 27.08.2017 between the petitioner and the defacto complainant, after marriage all of them lived in joint family for a period of 1 month thereafter the petitioner and defacto complainant arranged a separate resident. The allegation in the complaint is after the marriage the petitioner and his parents demanded dowry and continuously torture the defacto complainant and the petitioner is married to another women. Hence the complaint. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

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 A1 is absconding and A2 to A4 already released on bail. However, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the allegations and the nature of the offences involved in this matter and after the marriage of the petitioner and the defacto complainant there was some misunderstanding and the petitioner developed illegal intimation with another girl, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 06/12/2021 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, AWPS TIRUPPUR SOUTH, TIRUPPUR CITY.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.J.FRANKLIN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.23220/2021 Date :06/12/2021 RW 15/12/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/