Roselin Selvam v. The Inspector Of Police

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 417, 498 A, 406 and 506(2) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 in Cr.No.89 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the son of the petitioner and the defacto complainant got married on 12.05.2014. After their wedlock, the petitioner's son settled in USA. The allegation is that the defacto complainant's husband was gambling and not maintaining his wife. The further allegation is that he also harassed and demanded dowry from the defacto complainant. Hence, the case.

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. He further submitted that there was a matrimonial dispute between the petitioner's son and the defacto complainant, due to which, a false complaint against the

petitioner's son and that there was a suit pending in O.S.No.1961 of 2021 before the V Additional Family Court, Chennai. Hence prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that the defacto complainant's husband was gambling and not maintaining his wife and that he also harassed and demanded dowry from the defacto complainant. He would further submit that the petitioner is not co-operating for the investigation. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. This Court is not satisfied with the conduct of the petitioner as she is not co-operating for the investigation and this case requires a detailed investigation and this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 19.12.2022 anu

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

anu 19.12.2022