← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/10278/2021dismissed

Palani Murugan v. The Inspector Of Police

2021-10-07Honourable Mr Justice B.Pugalendhi3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 07/10/2021 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice B.PUGALENDHI

1. Palani Murugan

2. Sundaram

3. Shanthi

4. Ramar

5. Lakshmanan ... Petitioners/Accused 1 to 5 Vs The state rep.by, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thirumangalam, Madurai District.

(Crime No.16 of 2021) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.Prabu M, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.T.Senthilkumar, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory bail in Crime No.16 of 2021 on the file of the Respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A1 to A5, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent Police, for the offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 294(b) and 506(i) IPC in Crime No.16 of 2021, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the marriage between the petitioner and the defacto complainant was solemnized on 1/3

29.04.2020. After the marriage, the petitioners demanded more dowry from the defacto complainant, due to which, a dispute arose between the first petitioner and the defacto complainant. Thereafter, the first petitioner deserted the defacto complainant and also filed a divorce petition before the Sub Court, Thirumangalam in H.M.O.P.No.130 of 2021. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the first petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant and other petitioners are in-laws of the defacto complainant. The petitioners are innocents and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the first petitioner had love affair with the defacto complainant and had physical relationship with her and also made her pregnant. On knowing the same, the marriage was solemnized between the first petitioner and the defacto complainant on 29.04.2020 and a male child was born on 26.07.2020. After the marriage, the first petitioner deserted the defacto complainant and her child.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the conduct of the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. In the result, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 07/10/2021 / TRUE COPY / / /2021 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

OGY 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.

2/3

TO 1.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, THIRUMANGALAM, MADURAI DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10278 of 2021 Date :07/10/2021 RK/JM/SAR-II (26/10/2021) 3P 3C 3/3