Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/2885/2015closed

R.Senthil Raja v. The Inspector Of Police

2015-03-04Honourable Mr Justice P. N. Prakash2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Fourth day of March Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.2885 of 2015 1 R.SENTHIL RAJA 2 R.SALAIVALLI ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED Nos.1 & 2 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, MADURAI TOWN, CRIME NO.NOT KNOWN OF 2015.

... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.A.JAYARAMACHANDRAN, Advocate For Respondent : M/S.A.P.BALASUBRAMANIAN, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side) 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 alleged offences punishable under Sections 498(A) and 506(i) I.P.C. and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Dowry Prohibition Act in Crime No. Not Known of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State.

3. Since no regular case has been registered, this Court had granted interim anticipatory bail on 18.02.2015 for a period of two weeks to the petitioner with a direction to appear before the respondent police.

4. Today, the respondent police is present and filed a status report, in which in paragraph No.4, it is stated as follows: "4. I respectfully submit that on 20.02.2015, the 1st petitioner appeared before my subordinate Sub Inspector of Police namely T.Geetharamani and gave a statement that he is ready to live along with the defacto complainant at Tenkasi, but the same was rejected by the defacto complainant and she expressed her willing to live along with the 1st petitioner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

only at Madurai. Now the defacto complainant residing at Mother-in-law's house situated at Madurai. So the 1st petitioner come to conclusion that he is ready to hand over the jewels of 31 1/4 sovereigns to the defacto complainant on 20.04.2015 and will face the matrimonial dispute before the competent court of law. As per the statement of the 1st petitioner the present complaint was closed."

5. In view of the above, no further order is necessary in this case and hence, the Criminal Original Petition is closed. sd/- 04/03/2015 / 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, MADURAI TOWN.

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

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.2885 of 2015 Date :04/03/2015 msm 10.03.2015 p2/3c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/