Madras High CourtCRL OP/9186/2021dismissed

S.Vinoth Kumar v. The State Rep By

2021-05-13Honourable Mrs Justice S.Kannammal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Thirteenth day of May Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice S. KANNAMMAL CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.9186 of 2021 S.VINOTH KUMAR [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPRCTOR OF POLICE, K-8, ARUMBAKKAM POLICE STATION, CHENNAI CRIME NO.192/2021 For Petitioner : M/S. T.D.SIMON Advocate For Respondent : MR.T.SHUNMUGA RAJESWARAN, Government Advocate (crl.side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Section 67 of Information Technology Act 2000, in Crime No.192 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had frequently sent abusive messages and obscene photographs and videos to the de-facto complainant through whatsapp. On the basis of the complaint lodged by the de-facto complainant, a case has been registered against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has nothing to do with the alleged offence. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner had frequently sent abusive messages and obscene photographs and videos to the de-facto complainant through whatsapp. He vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner stating that investigation is pending and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary in this case.

5. Considering the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner and also it is said that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary in this case, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

-sd/- 13/05/2021 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, K-8, ARUMBAKKAM POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S. T.D.SIMON Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.9186/2021 Date :13/05/2021 cs 11/06/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/