Allowed

Kannadhasan v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC28 Sept 2021CRL OP(MD)/12270/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a criminal petition involving allegations of dowry harassment and public nuisance under the IPC and Tamil Nadu Dowry Prohibition Act. The court relied on a social welfare report indicating no dowry demand and imposed standard conditions including bond execution and prohibition of absconding.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail upon arrest or appearance before the Judicial Magistrate on furnishing a bond with two sureties and complying with listed conditions.

Kannadhasan Vs The Inspector of Police — Dowry and Cruelty | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 28/09/2021 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice B.PUGALENDHI CRL OP(MD) No.12270 of 2021 KANNADHASAN ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 Vs

¶3

THE STATE REP. BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, PARAMAKUDI, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT. CRIME NO. 14 OF 2021. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶4

For Petitioner : Mr.S.BALAMURUGAN, Advocate

¶5

For Respondent : Mr.T.SENTHILKUMAR, Government Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶6

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

¶7

PRAYER :

¶8

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.14 of 2021 on the file of the Respondent Police.

¶9

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶10

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 498(A), 506(i) of IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Dowry Prohibition Act, in Crime No.14 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶11

2.The case of the prosecution is that the marriage between the petitioner and the defacto complainant took place on 25.01.2021. After the marriage, the petitioner and others demanded dowry from the defacto complainant and threatened her. Hence, the complaint.

¶12

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case.

¶13

Heard the learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the respondent police.

¶14

This Court, by order dated 26.08.2021, referred the matter to the Social Welfare Committee to conduct enquiry and file a report. The District Social Welfare Officer has also filed a report https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ stating that there was no demand of dowry on the part of the petitioner.

¶15

¶16

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner, and also the fact that it is a matrimonial dispute, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶17

Accordingly, this criminal original petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Paramakudi, Ramanthapuram District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that:

¶18

[a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity.

¶19

[b] the petitioner shall report before respondent police as and when required.

¶20

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶21

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶22

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

¶23

[ f ]If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

Sd/-

28/09/2021

/ TRUE COPY /

/ /2021

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

¶29

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶30

ssb

¶31

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

¶32

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,

¶33

¶34

ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶35

¶36

THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PARAMAKUDI, RAMANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶37

DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE. RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶38

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, PARAMAKUDI, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶39

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

¶40

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12270 of 2021 Date : 28/09/2021

¶41

VB/VR/SAR-II/06.10.2021/3P/5C

¶42

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

Kannadhasan v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kannadhasan v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Senthil Kumar Vs The Inspector of Police

P.Jeyaseelan Vs The Inspector of Police

Nallammal Vs The Inspector of Police

Jothibaskaran Vs The Inspector of Police

Syed Mohammed Vs The Inspector of Police

Arunkumar Vs The Inspector of Police