M.Sarath v. Th Inspector Of Police

Crl.OP(MD)No.1471 of 2022 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Dated: 01/09/2022 PRESENT The Hon'ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN Crl.OP(MD)No.1471 of 2022 1.M.Sarath 2.G.Muraleedharan 3.Sarada 4.M.Abith : Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 Vs.

The State rep. By its The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thiruverumbur, Trichy District.

(In Crime No.4 of 2022) : Respondent/Complainant Vincy Verginiya ... Petitioner / Intervener IN CRL MP(MD)No.6730 of 2022 For Petitioners :

Mr.B.Jameel Arasu, Advocate.

For Respondent :

Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate(Criminal side) For Intervener :

Mr.A.Robinson, Advocate.

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C.C PRAYER:-For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.4 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order:- The petitioners, who are arrayed as A1 to A4 apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under sections 498(A), 506(i) IP)C r/w section 4 of TNPHW Act, in Crime No.4 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution, as per the complaint, that was lodged by the de-facto complainant is that there was love affair https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/2

Crl.OP(MD)No.1471 of 2022 between herself and A1, but the parents of A1 arranged marriage to A1 with some other girl. When that was enquired, A1 started disconnecting the contact. So, on 02/09/2021, she lodged a complaint against A1 before the All Women Police Station, Cantonment Police Station, Trichy. During the above said enquiry, even though the parents of A1 refused to accept her, marriage was performed in the presence of her parents in a temple. After that, they were living together. A1 started telling that only by force, the above said marriage was performed and by picking up quarrel, he left the matrimonial home. In spite of search, he could not be traced. On 21/12/2021, when she enquired about A1 with her in-laws she was assaulted by them, over which also, a complaint was given. The above said complaint was closed on the basis of some settlement that she has to approach the concerned police station. So, again the present complaint has been given.

3.Seeking anticipatory bail, the petitioners are before this court.

4.Heard both sides.

5.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that under threat and by force, the above said marriage was performed. He has also produced the photographs showing the marriage took place by force. But on going through the photographs, it is seen that the marriage took place not on compulsion or by force. 6.It is further submitted on the side of the petitioners that that the alleged marriage took place at 8.00 pm and no marriage will take place during night hours. Now whatever it may be, it is a matter for investigation.

7.Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is not entitled for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. sd/- 01/09/2022 / TRUE COPY / /09/2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, THIRUVERUMBUR, TRICHY DISTRICT.

2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.1471 of 2022 Date :01/09/2022 MK/VRS/SAR.I/15.09.2022/2P/3C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2