Vinayagamoorthi v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Eighth day of October Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.18441 of 2021 AND CRL.MP.No.10475 OF 2021 VINAYAGAMOORTHI [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, NAGAPATTINAM DISTRICT.

CR.NO.20 OF 2021.

For Petitioner : M/S. P.MUTHAMIZHSELVAKUMAR Advocate For Respondent : MR. C.E.PRATAP, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervenor : MR. B.THIYAGARAJAN Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b), 509, 354(b) of Indian Penal Code 1882 r/w Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act in Cr.No.20 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is a widow and had one female child and she lost her husband 11⁄2 years back. Taking advantage of her loneliness, the petitioner had frequently sent obscene messages and photos to the defacto complainant's mobile phone and threatened the defacto complainant for his lust.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a local president and already the defacto complainant had illegal intimacy with the rival president and the same was warned by the petitioner. Hence, the defacto complainant had lodged a false complaint against the petitioner.

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

4. The learned counsel for the intervenor submits that the defacto complainant is a widow and she is having one female child . The petitioner had continuously harassed the defacto complainant for his lust. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) submits that investigation is pending.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submissions made by both counsel and also the fact that that the petitioner is said to have threatened the defacto complainant and demanded for sexual affairs, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed. -sd/- 08/10/2021 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, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, NAGAPATTINAM DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+1 CC to M/S. P.MUTHAMIZHSELVAKUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.11355 CRL. OP.NO.18441/2021 AND CRL.MP.No.10475 OF 2021 Date :08/10/2021 INBA-27/10/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/