B.Geetha v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Sixteenth day of August Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.13941 of 2016 B.GEETHA ...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED No.2 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, NILAKKOTTAI, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

CRIME NO.14 OF 2016 ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.M.RAMAN 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 petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.2, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 494, 498(A), 506(ii) and 109 IPC, in Crime No.14 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the wife of one Selvan/A.1 and A.1 is working as a police constable. The petitioner/A.2 married the husband of the defacto complainant-A.1, who is also working as police constable, while the marriage between the defacto complainant and A.1 is subsisting. On complaint, case has been registered against the petitioner and other accused for the above said offences.

3.The case of the petitioner is that A.1 is a stranger to the petitioner and the petitioner did not marry A.1. The defacto complainant has given a false complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Dindigul, and the same has been forwarded to the respondent police and without conducting enquiry, case has been registered against the petitioner and she is an innocent person and she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the defacto complainant is the wife of A.1. While the marriage between the defacto complainant and A.1 is subsisting, the petitioner married A.1 and investigation is pending.

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

5.Considering the serious nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

sd/- 16/08/2016 / 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, NILAKKOTTAI, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.13941 of 2016 Date :16/08/2016 ps SD/SK-SKN/24.08.2016/2P/3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/