T.Neerath Pandian v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20/10/2022 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice A.A.NAKKIRAN CRL OP(MD). No.14116 of 2022 T.Neerath Pandian ... Petitioner/Accused Not Known (AMENDED AS PER ORDER OF THE COURT DATED 19/09/2022 in Crl.MP(MD).10806/2022 IN CRL OP(MD)14116/2022) Vs 1 The State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, Sivakasi Town Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

Crime No.346 of 2022.

... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT

2. Pandiselvi, ... 2nd Respondent (R2 is Suo Motu Impleaded as per order of the Court dated 04/08/2022 in CRL OP (MD)14116/2022) For Petitioner :

M/s.Solaisamy M, Advocate.

For Respondent No.1 :

Mr.M.Muthumanikkam, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Respondent No.2 :

Mr.Raja Ravi Varma, Advocate.

For Intervenor :

None Appearance.

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.346 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 294(b), 324 and 506(ii) IPC r/w Section 4 of Woemn Harassment Act, in Crime No.346 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, who is none other than husband of the defacto complainant, dashed the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/2

defacto complainant with his Motor Car and that defacto complainant sustained injuries. When the same was questioned by the defacto complainant's father, the petitioner threatened them with dire consequences. Hence, the compliant.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and his name has been falsely implicated in this case.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that due to matrimonial dispute between the husband and wife, the petitioner dashed the defacto complainant by using his motor car and that she sustained fracture and not yet recovered from the hospital. He would further submit that the investigation of the case is pending and hence, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary and he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent that the injured is still in hospital and also considering the serious nature of allegations made against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 20/10/2022 / TRUE COPY / /11/2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SIVAKASI TOWN POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.14116 of 2022 Date :20/10/2022 TRP MK/BUC/SAR 3/17.11.2022/2P/3C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2