Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/12537/2017closed

Sobi v. The Inspector Of Police

2017-10-09Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Ninth day of October Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL OP(MD) No.12537 of 2017 1 SOBI 2 PREEDA 3 STEPHEN 4 BEULA NELSON ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN Vs THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, KUZHITHURAI, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT CRIME NO.NOT KNOWN OF 2017 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : Mr.R.PON KARTHIKEYAN Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.ANBARASAN, Government Advocate (Crl.side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners/accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 498(A), 294(b) of IPC., and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, in Crime No.Not Known of 2017, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the marriage between the defacto complainant and her husband was solemnized on 07.05.2014 as per Christian Rites and Customs. At the time of marriage, the parents of the defacto complainant had given 17 sovereigns jewels and Rs.5,00,000/- along with household articles. Subsequently for want of dowry, the in-laws and her husband subjected her to cruelty and driven out of the matrimonial home. Thereby, a case has been registered against the petitioners. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed this criminal original petition.

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

3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. According to the petitioners, being adamant in nature, the defacto complainant made frivolous allegations against the petitioners and lodged a false complaint.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the State, on instructions, would submit that based on the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and as per the direction of this Court, each and every District has formed a District Level Committee in order to settle the issues related to Section 498(A) of IPC cases. Accordingly, the case was referred to the District Level Committee for proper decision. Hence, this anticipatory bail petition is pre-matured one.

5. Recording the statement made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), this Criminal Original Petition is closed as pre-matured. However, if any adverse order passed by the District Level Committee, it is open to the petitioners to work out the remedy in the manner known to law.

sd/- 09/10/2017 / 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, KUZHITHURAI, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT 2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S.R.PON KARTHIKEYAN Advocate SR.No.32362

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.12537 of 2017 Date :09/10/2017 sm SH/RR-BS/SAR-3:24.10.2017: 2p/4c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/