Dismissed

Mrs. B. Madhumathi, 27 Yrs, v. Mr. S.Babu, 33 Yrs

Madras HC23 Nov 2017CRL OP/24039/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Originin Petition challenged the anticipatory bail granted to the appellant in a case involving Section 406 and 498A IPC offences. The petitioner alleged non-payment of maintenance and harassment. The High Court rejected the petition, directing the petitioner to pursue maintenance remedies through known legal channels and to file fresh complaints for any assault.

What did the court decide?

Petition for cancellation of anticipatory bail stands dismissed; petitioner directed to workout remedies for maintenance and lodge fresh complaint for assault if any.

Mrs. B. Madhumathi, 27 Yrs, Vs Mr. S.Babu, 33 Yrs — Domestic Violence | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 23.11.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N. PRAKASH

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.24039 of 2017

¶6

B.Madhumathi .... Petitioner
Vs
1. S.Babu
2. The State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
W-1, AWPS, Thousand lights,
Chennai-600 006.
Crime No.8/2016 .... Respondents
Petition filed under Section 439(2) of Criminal Procedure
Code to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the above
accused in Cri.O.P.No.1699/2017.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.P.Loganathan
For Respondents: Mr.K.Madhan,
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
O R D E R
For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred
to by their name.

¶7

On the complaint lodged by Madhumathi, the police registered a case in Crime No.8 of 2016 under Sections 406 and 498A IPC against Babu and his family members. This court, by order dated 06.09.2017, in Crl O.P.No. 1699 of 2017, granted anticipatory bail to Babu, the first respondent herein, on certain conditions. This petition for cancellation of anticipatory bail has been filed by Madhumathi on the ground that Babu is not properly paying the maintenance amount and that he and his family members are harassing Madhumathi during Domestic Violence Act proceedings before the Additional Mahila Court, Egmore. It is seen that investigation has been completed in Crime No.8 of 2016 and charge sheet has also been filed in C.C.No.176 of 2017 against Babu before Additional Mahila Court, Magisterial level, Allikkulam, (Egmore), Chennai.

¶8

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶9

If Babu does not appear before Trial Court or does not cooperate, it is always open to the Trial Court to cancel the anticipatory bail since this Court has empowered the trial Court in the order dated 06.09.2017 in Crl. O.P.No. 1699 of 2017.

¶10

On the grounds raised by Madhumathi, the bail cannot be cancelled and it is for her to workout her remedies in the manner known to law for collecting the arrears of maintenance. If there is any assault committed by Babu and his family members, its always open to Madhumathi and her family members to lodge a fresh complaint for assault before the jurisdictional police station.

¶11

With the above observation, this petition stands
dismissed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS IX)
//True copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
mm
To
1. The Additional Mahila Court
Magisterial Level
Egmore, Chennai.
2. The Inspector of Police,
W-1, AWPS, Thousand lights,
Chennai-600 006.
3.The Public Prosecutor
High Court, Madras
Crl.O.P.No.24039 of 2017
GN(12/12/2017)

¶12

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Mrs. B. Madhumathi, 27 Yrs, v. Mr. S.Babu, 33 Yrs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. B. Madhumathi, 27 Yrs, v. Mr. S.Babu, 33 Yrs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ssaababathi Vs Dhanasekaran

M/S.G.v.Films Ltd., Rep.by Vs M/S.Golden Square Films (P)

M/S.Madhura Polymes Pvt.Ltd. Vs S.Suresh

V.Udayakumar (40 Years), Vs State Rep by

Murugan, (M/48 Years) Vs State Rep. by

Priya @ Parimala, Vs the State Rep by Its