N.Venkatesh Sriram Kumar v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twenty Second day of June Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.9846 of 2016 N.VENKATESH SRIRAM KUMAR ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT, CRIME NO.7/2016 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S M.VEILKANI RAJU 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.1, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 406 and 506(i) of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act in Crime No.7 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the marriage between the petitioner and the defacto complainant was solemnized on 29.05.2015. At the time of marriage, the father of the defacto complainant gave a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- for marriage expenses and house hold articles worth Rs.3,00,000/- and jewels to the petitioner. But, the petitioner pledged the jewels for his personal expenses. When the defacto complainant demanded the same, the petitioner throw her out from matrimonial home. On complaint, a case has been registered against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner redeemed the jewels and handed over the same to the defacto complainant. But, the defacto complainant continued the wordy quarrel and left the matrimonial home on her own volition and gave a false complaint against the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side).

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Thirunelveli, and on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police twice a week i.e on every Saturday and Sunday at 10.00 am until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

7. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed.

sd/- 22/06/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, THIRUNELVELI. 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUNELVELI. 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECTUOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S M.VEILKANI RAJU Advocate SR.No.32120 TRP CSL/SK-SKN/SAR-III/24.06.2016 : 2P/6C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9846 of 2016 Date :22/06/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/