Vasanatharajan v. State Through

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 292 of IPC and Section 66 (E) of Information Technology Act, 2000 in Crime No.17 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant is that she is an Anganwadi worker at Nagapattinam District. On 11.10.2022, an unknown person had called her through her mobile phone and abused her in filthy language and also sent obscene photos and videos to her. Subsequently, he also contacted the other Anganwadi staffs till 10.00 p.m. on the same day and disturbed them through phone call and whatsapp. Hence, the case.

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

case and that he is ready to co-operate with the respondent police for investigation. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner sating that the petitioner is a habitual offender against whom there are three previous cases pending. It is a case where the petitioner has sent obscene photos and videos not only to the defacto complainant, but also to several other Anganwadi workers and disturbed them. The petitioner is in the habit of sending obscene photos and videos to several women and disturbing them. He further submitted that the petitioner has got 8 phone numbers and 6 mobile phones through which, he has repeatedly indulged in this type of offence. Therefore, the mobile phones of the petitioner are to be recovered and that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required for investigation purpose. Hence, he prayed for the dismissal of the present petition.

5. The learned counsel for the Intervenor / defacto complainant submitted that the petitioner had received the phone numbers of the Anganwadi workers from the main office and disturbed them including the defacto complainant by sexual conversations and also sent obscene photos and videos to them. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Heard the learned counsel on either side of the parties and perused the materials available on record.

7. Taking into consideration the serious nature of offence and the fact that the petitioner has got three previous cases against him and also considering the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) that the mobile phones of the petitioner are to be recovered and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for further investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J., ksa-2

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

12.04.2023 ksa-2