Senthilkumar v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Twenty Second day of July Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.12580 of 2016 1 SENTHILKUMAR 2 CHELLAMMAL ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, KOVILPATTI, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.
CRIME NO. 10 OF 2016 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S C.BHARATHI Advocate For Respondent : MR.P.KANNITHEVAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for an alleged offence punishable under Sections 498(A) and 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of Women Harassment Act and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act in Crime No.10 of 2016, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the first petitioner married the defacto complainant and at the time of marriage 15 sovereigns of gold jewels and household articles and Rs.15,000/- were given to the defacto complainant. At the time of marriage, the first petitioner was working as a driver and they were living together in the matrimonial home at Chennai. Two male children were born in the wedlock on 27.08.2007 and 06.06.2012 respectively, however, after the birth of the first child, in the year 2010, at the instigation of the second petitioner, the first petitioner has been torturing the defacto complainant by demanding dowry. While so, on 26.03.2016 the first petitioner beaten the defacto complainant and locked her in the house and threatened not to move out from home. On complaint, a case has been registered against the petitioners.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and their names have been falsely https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
implicated in this case.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that the first petitioner is the President of Co-operative Society and he is influenced person and he is having illicit intimacy with another lady and due to which he tortured the defacto complainant and the investigation of the case is pending. He further submitted that if the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail they will abscond and tamper the witness and hamper the investigation.
5. Considering the serious nature of allegations levelled against the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 22/07/2016 / 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, KOVILPATTI,THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.
2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECTUOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S C.BHARATHI Advocate SR.No.38892 TRP CSL/AAL-MPA/SAR-I/29.07.2016 : 2P/4C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.12580 of 2016 Date :22/07/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/