Bhavani v. State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Eighteenth day of May Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.11394 of 2022 BHAVANI [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP.BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, W19, ADYAR ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

CR.NO.2 OF 2022.

For Petitioner : M/S.G.MOHANA KRISHNAN 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, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 354A, 354C, 506(i), 509, 34 of IPC and 66E and 67A of Information Technology Act, in Crime No.2 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. Totally, there are 5 accused and the petitioner is arrayed as A2. The case of the prosecution is that A1, as an Admin, created a face book group named WSB Rebels 2.0. and the petitioner/A2 herein is a moderator and through which, they accepted the women and propounded various ideas for extra marital relationship with other persons. In which, the defacto complainant also joined in the year 2019 and A4, said to have developed intimacy with the defacto complainant and taken photos and videos. Thereafter, they had misused the said photos and hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the false case has been foisted as against the petitioner and hence he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that totally there are five accused in this case. A1, who is an Australian citizen, has created a face book group in the name of WSB Rebels 2.0, in which, the petitioner/A2 is a Moderator and the defacto complainant joined in the said face book in the year 2019 and she had affair with some other persons and took photos and using the same, they threatened the defacto complainant and hence he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case that the petitioner has committed very heinous offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. When this Court about to dismiss the petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the petition and also he made an endorsement to that effect.

6. In view of the submission and endorsement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn. -sd/- 18/05/2022 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, W19, ADYAR ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.G.MOHANA KRISHNAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.11394/2022 Date :18/05/2022 SP(20/05/2022)