Earnest Thevathayalan v. The 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.19032 of 2021 EARNEST THEVATHAYALAN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, T-14, MANGADU POLICE STATION, CHENNAI-600 122.
(CR NO.887/2021) For Petitioner : M/S.R.VIVEKANANTHAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.C.E.PRATAP, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervenor : MR.K.G.SENTHILKUMAR 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 offences U/S 354D, 509, 506(i) of IPC and 43r/w 66 of Information Technology Act, in Crime No.887 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 tik-tok artist. She had love affair with the friend of the petitioner and the same was not liked by the petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner threatened the defacto complainant and her friend as if he will publish the morphed photos in the social media. Hence the complaint was registered by the Law Enforcing Agency. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that there are no previous cases pending against the petitioner. However, he opposed grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case no serious allegations made against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Accordingly, the petitioner ia ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the Learned District Munsif - cum- Judicial Magistrate, Sriperumbudur on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:
(a) the petitioner shall affix his photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Court concerned may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity; (b) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.
(c)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
(d)the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
(e) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; and; (f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.
-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 DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SRIPERUMBUDUR.
2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE CHENGALPATTU [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, T-14, MANGADU POLICE STATION, CHENNAI-600 122.
4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
+1CC to M/S.R.VIVEKANANTHAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.11372 CRL OP.19032/2021 Date :08/10/2021 CSK 22/10/2021