Sevugan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Fourth day of January Two Thousand and Twenty Four PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI SEVUGAN ... PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED Vs 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KEELAVALAVU POLICE STATION, MELUR, MADURAI DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO.176 OF 2023) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT (*)2 BAGAMPRIYA ... 2ND RESPONDENT (*)(R2 IS SUO-MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER OF THE COURT DATED 28/07/2023 IN CRL.OP(MD)13791 OF 2023) For Petitioner :

M/S.R.BOOPATHI, Advocate For Respondent :

MR.P.KOTTAICHAMY, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL UNDER SEC 438 OF CR.P.C. PRAYER :

FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CRIME NO.176 OF 2023 ON THE FILE OF THE RESPONDENT POLICE.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- 1/3

The petitioner/Sole Accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 342, 323 and 506(ii) of IPC in Cr.No.176 of 2023, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the daughter of the petitioner. Due to harassment made by the petitioner, the mother of the defacto complainant had committed suicide. Thereafter, since the petitioner refused to pay maintenance, the defacto complainant and her brother are under the care and custody of their grandparents. On the particular date, the petitioner threatened the children namely, the defacto complainant and her brother and also attacked them with hand. Thereby, the defacto complainant made a complaint before the Law Enforcing Authority against the petitioner.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that there is no instruction from the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State would submit that even though the petitioner is having lot of properties, he refused to pay the maintenance to the children. Further, he also made an attack upon the children. Thereby, the defacto complainant, made a complaint against him. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the 2/3

allegation levelled against the petitioner that he failed to pay the maintenance to his children and also made an assault upon them, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. sd/- 04/01/2024 / TRUE COPY / /01/2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

dss TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICEKEELAVALAVU POLICE STATION, MELUR, MADURAI DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN Date :04/01/2024 SA/DD/SAR-(09.01.2024) 3P 3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 3/3