Dhanigainathan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

A.A.NAKKIRAN , J.

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A) of IPC and 9(m), 9(n), 10 of POCSO Act in Crime No.324 of 2022, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner harassed his wife/defacto complainant on the ill advise of his father, brother and sisters. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that a false case has been foisted against the petitioner. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

A.A.

NAKKIRAN , J.

4.Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner harassed the defacto complainant for the sake of property. The 164 statement was recorded and the investigation was completed. However, the charge sheet was not yet numbered. Hence, he vehemently opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.Taking into account the gravity of offence and the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

28.12.2022 vkr/nsa