Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/6707/2019ordered

R.Sathishkumar v. The Inspector Of Police

2019-05-15Honourable Mr Justice B.Pugalendhi2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Fifteenth day of May Two Thousand and Nineteen PRESENT The Hon'ble Mr Justice B.PUGALENDHI CRL OP(MD) No.6707 of 2019 1 R.SATHISHKUMAR 2 GAJALAKSHMI ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN Vs 1 STATE REP. BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE INDERPURI POLICE STATION, WEST DELHI, NEW DELHI (CRIME NO.83/2019) 2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE GANESH NAGAR POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI ... RESPONDENTS / COMPLAINANTS For Petitioners : M/S.J.ANANDKUMAR, 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 petitioners/accused, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 498 A and 406 of IPC in Crime No.83 of 2019 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Inder Puri, New Delhi, seek anticipatory bail.

2.Heard Mr.J.Anandkumar, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mrs.S.Bharathi, learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the first respondent and Mr.A.Robinson, learned Government Advocate (Crl Side) appearing for the second respondent. 3.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant and the first petitioner and the defacto complainant are husband and wife. Due to some misunderstanding the defacto complainant left the matrimonial house and lodged a complaint before the Inder puri police station, New Delhi that the petitioners have demanded dowry from her.

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

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, they pray to grant anticipatory bail.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl Side) appearing for the second respondent Police opposes the grant of anticipatory bail. 6.The petitioners undertook to approach the concerned Court and move a regular anticipatory bail. For enabling him to go to Delhi and to move a regular anticipatory bail before the concerned Court, the petitioners seek interim protection.

7.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant interim anticipatory bail to the petitioners for a period of four weeks for enabling the petitioners to move the concerned Court for regular anticipatory bail.

8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. sd/- 15/05/2019 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE INDERPURI POLICE STATION, WEST DELHI, NEW DELHI 2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE GANESH NAGAR POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI 3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S.J.ANANDKUMAR Advocate SR.No.8578

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.6707 of 2019 Date :15/05/2019 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ES/VR/17.05.2019/2P/5C