Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/7876/2019dismissed

Ajithkumar v. The Inspector Of Police

2019-06-12Honourable Mr Justice P. Rajamanickam2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twelfth day of June Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice P.RAJAMANICKAM CRL OP(MD) No.7876 of 2019 AJITHKUMAR ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.1 Vs STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, VALLAM, THANJAVUR DISTRICT.

CRIME NO.3/2019 ... RESPONDENT For Petitioner : MR.C.JEGANATHAN, Advocate for M/S.VEERA ASSOCIATES For Respondent : MR.V.NEELAKANDAN, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 495, 498 (A), 506 of IPC, in Crime No.3 of 2019, seek anticipatory bail.

2. Heard both sides.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in the above case, She further submitted that the defacto complainant has lodged a false complaint against the petitioner and his family members only for extracting money. He further submitted that the petitioner has not at all married the defacto complainant. He further submitted that already this Court has granted anticipatory bail to the accused Nos.2 to 4 in Cr.OP(MD) No.2142 of 2019. He further submitted that even though the petitioner herein also asked anticipatory bail in Crl.OP(MD)No.2142 of 2019, this Court has dismissed the petition insofar as the petitioner herein is concerned and thereafter, the investigation has been completed and therefore he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

4.Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent has submitted that the investigation is still pending and there is no change of circumstances for entertaining the second anticipatory bail petition. He further submitted that the petitioner is absconding and hence, the police has not arrested him. He further submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is absolutely necessary and therefore, he is strongly opposed this petition.

5. This Court is of the considered view that the previous anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner herein and other accused in Crl.OP(MD)No.2142 of 2019 was dismissed insofar as the petitioner herein is concerned on 11.02.2019. Insofar as other accused persons are concerned, this Court granted anticipatory bail. After dismissal of the said petition, the petitioner has not shown any change of circumstances. Taking into consideration of the allegations made against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 12/06/2019 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, VALLAM, THANJAVUR DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.7876 of 2019 Date :12/06/2019 JM/VR/SAR 2/18.06.2019/2P/3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/