S.Vinoth Kumar v. The State Represented By

Crl.O.P.No.10128 of 2021 Crl.O.P.No.10417 of 2021 S.KANNAMMAL.J, The petitioner,who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable 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 defacto complainant through whatsapp. On the basis of the complaint lodged by the defacto complainant, a case has been registered against the petitioner. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that this is second anticipatory bail petition and the earlier petition was dismissed by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.9186 of 2021 dated 13.05.2021. The petitioner is an innocent person and he has nothing to do with the alleged offence. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail. 1/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

Crl.O.P.No.10128 of 2021 S.KANNAMMAL.J, mpa 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the defacto complainant is a lawyer. Earlier, the defacto complainant and petitioner were working in the same organisation. The petitioner had sent the obscene vidoes and messages to the defacto complainant. He further submitted that the defacto complainant after leaving the group, the petitioner added the defacto complainant's number in the group and again and again sent the obscene vidoes and messages to her. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner and serious objection of learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 25.06.2021 MPA 2/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/