P.Anitha v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 25/05/2022 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice P.VELMURUGAN
1. P.Anitha,
2. Periyasamy,
3. P.Gomathy,
4. Venmathi, ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 Vs State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, S.S.Colony Police Station, Madurai.
Crime No.759 of 2022..
... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners : Mr.R.J.Karthick, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.S.Manikandan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.759 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 406, 420 and 506(i) IPC in Crime No.759 of 2022, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant got married in the year 2012 and due to misunderstanding, they filed a petition to dissolve the marriage. While being so, the defacto complainant approached one Subburaj for his second marriage and he 1/3
introduced the petitioner's family in the year 2021 and marriage was engaged between the defacto complainant and the first petitioner and thereafter, the petitioners swindled huge amount. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are not involved in the occurrence and they are no way connected with this case. He would also submit that the defacto complainant only cheated the petitioners.
4. The learned counsel for the intervenor/defacto complainant submitted that the petitioners made a false promise of marriage and engagement was also taken place between the first petitioner and the defacto complainant. During the engagement, the defacto complainant offered gold ornaments worth about Rs.4,90,000/- and a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- was given in case thereafter. On receiving the same, the first petitioner cheated the defacto complainant and married another person. Hence, he prays for dismissal of this petition.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the investigation is in preliminary stage.
6. The defacto complainant, on suspicion, has lodged the complaint against the petitioners. Only during investigation it would reveal whether the petitioners cheated the defacto complainant or the defacto complainant cheated the petitioners. 7.In view of the above, the petitioners/accused are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs and Fifty Thousand Only) to the credit of Crime No.759 of 2022 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Madurai and surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and file a bail application before the Magistrate and if they file an application for bail along with the receipt, the learned Magistrate is directed to consider their bail application, on the same day and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law.
8. With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.
sd/- 25/05/2022 / TRUE COPY / / /2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
2/3
IAS/SN Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V MADURAI 2 DO-THROUGH :
THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI DISTRICT.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE S.S.COLONY POLICE STATION, MADURAI.
THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.9216 of 2022 Date :25/05/2022 PKP/VR/SAR-4/26.05.2022/3P/5C 3/3