Manikandan v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 10.02.2025
CORAM:
THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN K. Manikandan S/o. Kumar .. Petitioner / Accused Vs State rep. by:- The Inspector Of Police, W-2 All Women Police Station, Kancheepuram District.
... Respondent [Cr. No.2 of 2025 ] PRAYER: - The Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., praying to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner / Accused in Crime No.2 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.Raja D For Respondent : Mr. S. Balaji, Government Advocate [Criminal side]
ORDER
The petitioner / Accused, who apprehends arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406 of 1/7
IPC and Section 67(A) of Information Technology Act in connection with the case in Crime No.2 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the defacto complainant had love affair since 2019; that the petitioner had received a sum of Rs.1 lakh and a laptop, promising to repay the amount and return the laptop and thereafter, the petitioner refused to marry the defacto complainant and also sent some obscene photographs and videos to both the defacto complainant and her mother.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is an innocent; that he has been falsely implicated in this case; that he is willing to handover the laptop to the defacto complainant and the alleged money transactions are not true and there was a consensual relationship between the petitioner and the defacto complainant; that regarding sending of obscene photos and videos, it is also false; and that the custodial interrogation is not required in this case and hence prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/7
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), per contra, would submit that considering the nature of allegations, the petition for anticipatory bail may be dismissed.
5. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the laptop is with the petitioner and he is ready to handover the laptop to the respondent police.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and since the petitioner and the defacto complainant were in consensual relationship and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on certain conditions.
3/7
8. Accordingly, 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, Sriperumbudur on condition that petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent Police or the Police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further conditions that: [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 Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity. [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. 4/7
[c] the petitioner shall handover the Laptop to the respondent police, who in turn, shall handover the same to the defacto complainant;
[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[f] 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].
[g] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered 5/7
under Section 269 B.N.S.
10.02.2025 mjs To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Sriperumbudur.
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. 3.The Inspector Of Police, W-2 All Women Police Station, Kancheepuram District.
SUNDER MOHAN. J., mjs 6/7
10.02.2025 7/7