Mrs.Anusha Rani v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Second day of February Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL OP(MD) No.1628 of 2018 MRS.ANUSHA RANI ... PETITIONER Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ANJUGRAMAM POLICE STATION, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.

CRIME NO.342/2017 ... RESPONDENT For Petitioner : Mr.G.V.VAIRAM SANTHOSH Advocate For Respondent : Mr.A.ROBINSON, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner/A4, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 174 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 @ Section 498(A) and 304(B) of IPC., in Crime No.342 of 2017, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is arrayed as A4 in this case. The deceased is the wife of the petitioner's brother/A1, now, he is in abroad. A2 and A3 are the parents of the petitioner. The allegation made against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with other accused have harassed the deceased by demanding additional dowry. Hence, the case has been registered against the accused persons for the above said crime.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and she has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the investigation is in progress. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5. The submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for either side are considered. It is alleged that during the time of

occurrence, the petitioner herein and other accused in this case made harassment towards the defacto complainant in order to get additional dowry. Moreover, on go through the inquest report submitted by the RDO, he concludes that the offence was committed by the petitioners only for the above said reasons. As of now, the first accused/A1, who is the husband of the deceased is in abroad. So, considering the gravity of offence committed by the petitioner, custodial interrogation is necessary for completing the investigation. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

sd/- 02/02/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ANJUGRAMAM POLICE STATION, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.

2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S.G.V.VAIRAM SANTHOSH Advocate SR.No.1903 PJL JAM/19/02/2018/PM-PN/ SAR 4/ 2P-4C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.1628 of 2018 Date :02/02/2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/