K. Tamizh Selvan, v. Pudukottai All Women Police St

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Third day of December Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.16219 of 2015 K. THAMIZH SELVAN ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED (RANK NOT KNOWN) Vs THE STATE REP.BY PUDUKOTTAI ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, PUDUKOTTAI DISTRICT IN CRIME NO NOT KNOWN /2015 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.G.S.ASHOK ADHITHYAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.ANBARASAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as accused in Crime No.10 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498 (A) and 506(i) of I.P.C.

, and hence, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the marriage between the petitioner and the de-facto complainant was solemnized on 30.06.2014 and after the marriage, both the petitioner and the de-facto complainant were lead their matrimonial life in the petitioner's house and the petitioner demanded additional dowry and harassed the de-facto complainant. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the marriage between the petitioner and the de-facto complainant was solemnized on 30.06.2014 at Kamalabala Thirumana Mahall, Viralimalai.

After the marriage, the de-facto complainant quarrelled with the petitioner for flimsy reasons and left the matrimonial home without informing to the petitioner or his parents. He further submitted that the petitioner took several steps for reunion with the help of village elders and the same was failed. Therefore, the petitioner filed H.M.O.P.No.179 of 2015 on the file of the Sub Court, Pudukottai for divorce and after receiving the summons from the Court, the de-facto complainant has given a false complaint. 4.Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side)appearing for the State.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

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

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pudukottai and on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously. 7.The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed. sd/- 03/12/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PUDUKOTTAI 2 DO THRO THE CHEIF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE PUDUKOTTAI DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUDUKOTTAI ALL WOMEN PLICE STATION, PUDUKOTTAI DISTRICT.

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S.G.S.ASHOK ADHITHYAN Advocate SR.No.69428.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.16219 of 2015 Date :03/12/2015 AM/04.12.2015/NGM.SS/SAR-I/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/