Madras High Court

CRL OP(MD)/17516/2017 of DIVYA, Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, on 28 December 2017

Cites 0, Cited by 0

BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Eighth day of December Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice S.VAIDYANATHAN CRL OP(MD) No.17516 of 2017 DIVYA ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.1 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHINNAMANUR POLICE

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT( Criminal Jurisdiction )

Thursday, the Twenty Eighth day of December Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT

The Hon`ble Mr Justice S.VAIDYANATHAN

CRL OP(MD) No.17516 of 2017

DIVYA

... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.1

Vs

STATE REP.BYTHE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHINNAMANUR POLICE STATION, THENI DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO.611 OF 2017) ... RESPONDENT

For Petitioner : M/S.S.KAMESWARAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S.K.ANBARASAN, Government Advocate(Crl.Side)

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

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police forthe alleged offence punishable under Section 174 I.P.C. altered into306 IPC in Crime No.525 of 2017 on the file of the respondentpolice, the petitioner has come forward with this petition seekinganticipatory bail.

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and thelearned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondentpolice.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is thewife of the deceased and due to her illicit relationship with A2 andthe abusive words used by A2 against the deceased, the deceasedcommitted suicide by hanging in his home.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that due towordy quarrel the petitioner went to his parents house along withher minor child, subsequently the deceased committed suicide and thepetitioner has to take care of her minor child aged 2 ½ years.

5. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit thatinvestigation is pending.

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

6.The contention of the petitioner that she is having a 2 ½year old minor child cannot be ground for anticipatory bail in this case. Taking note of the fact that serious allegations have beenmade against the petitioner and it is a matter for investigation,this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of thepetitioner is necessary in this case and therefore, this Court isnot inclined to grant anticipatory bail to him.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

sd/-

28/12/2017

/ TRUE COPY /

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

1. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHINNAMANUR POLICE STATION, THENI DISTRICT.

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

ORDER IN

CRL OP(MD) No.17516 of 2017

Date :28/12/2017

MS/CM-VR/SAR.1/02.01.2018/2P.3C

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead