Samundeeswari v. Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Nineteenth day of May Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.10790 of 2022 SAMUNDEESWARI [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION, VELLORE, VELLORE DISTRICT.

CRIME NO.22 OF 2021 For Petitioner : M/S. E.KANNADASAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.DAMODARAN, Additional public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 7(a) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended in 2018, in Crime No.22 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. Heard both sides.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner who has been arrayed as A1, is working as Sanitary Supervisor in Gudiyatham Municipality since 03.01.2014 and one P.Saravanan, who has been arrayed as A2 has been running three hotels and the petitioner is having jurisdiction over the said three hotels and she had a cordial relationship with A2 and she regularly collects the garbage and wastages in the above said three hotels at doorsteps by engaging sanitary workers for which she used to collect Rs.9,000/- per month as salary from A2, which was transferred through his mobile payment to

the petitioner's account. On one occasion, during conversation between them A2 recorded her demand in his cell phone and circulated the audio file on social media. Hence, a case was registered against the petitioner and A2.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that in view of the circulation of audio files on the social media, the Commissioner of Gudiyatham Municipality initiated departmental enquiry by suspending her from service on 14.05.2021 and final order has been passed vide proceedings dated 05.07.2021 by non-granting of increment for a period of one year. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and she has nothing to do with the alleged offence.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner committed very serious offence and hence, he objects for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He further submitted that the earlier petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 10.03.2022 in Crl.O.P.No.5562 of 2022.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the petitioner committed very serious offence and that there is no change of circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 19/05/2022 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, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION, VELLORE, VELLORE DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S. E.KANNADASAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.10790/2022 Date :19/05/2022 JPA 26/05/2022