Mohana Sundaram v. The State Rep. By

Crl.O.P.No.6743 of 2020 Crl.O.P.No.6743 of 2020 T.RAJA,J.

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Section 67(A) IT Act, 354 (D), 509, 506(i) of IPC and Section 4 of Women Harassment Act in Cr.No.5 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant ordered pizza and there was a quarrel between the defacto complainant and the delivery boy, due to which, the delivery boy is alleged to have shared the defacto complainant's phone number in Whatsapp group saying her as a call girl. Hence, the defacto complainant received many phone calls from unknown persons using obscene words, which made her to give the complaint. The allegation against the petitioner is that he is one of such persons who gave her call with obscene words. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution 1/2 http://www.judis.nic.in

Crl.O.P.No.6743 of 2020 and he has been falsely implicated in this case. T.RAJA,J.

pri/dua 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.Considering the serious objection raised by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and since this Court is not able to find any merit in this petition, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.This criminal original petition is accordingly dismissed. 23.03.2020 pri/dua Crl.O.P.No.6743 of 2020 23.03.2020 2/2 http://www.judis.nic.in