Leo Stalin v. The State Rep By

CRL.OP.No.28854 of 2024 A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offence punishable under Sections 465, 466, 471, 474 r/w 420 of IPC in Crime No.158 of 2024 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant is that one Mr.Balamurugan, after taking charge of the office of the Superintending Engineer-4 (FAC), Construction Wing, CMDA, "E" Road, Tower III, Koyambedu had found that some official documents belonging to CMDA had been circulated through social media particularly through Savukku Media wherein they had spread false information regarding the tender approval given to M/s.BVG India Private Limited and defamed CMDA and the State Government. Further, based on the information published through Savukku Media dated 11.02.2024 at 8.41 PM, the passengers were involved in a protest at the Chennai's new Karunannidhi Centenary Bus Terminus in Kilambakkam and that they are tarnishing the reputation of the State Government and 1/6

the higher Administrative Officials. Hence the case. 3.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is working as a staff in Savukku Media Youtube Channel and his role is very limited. He would submit that the co-accused was arrested and enlarged on bail. He would further submit that the respondent had falsely foisted a case against the petitioner. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail.

4.Learned Governed Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent Police while opposing for grant of anticipatory bail submitted that the respondent Police/Investigation Officer has filed an objection stating that during the course of investigation, the petitioner/accused intentionally spoke the content to provocate the co-accused Shankar @ Savukku Shankar based on the forged digital record of CMDA content. He would submit that the petitioner/accused is working as a Production Manager in Savukku Media who influenced the co-accused through his inducing questions to instigate general public against the State Government, the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu and CMDA Authorities. Hence, the petitioner/accused was summoned through a notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. During the enquiry, a questionnaire 2/6

was written by the petitioner/accused and he denied that he does not know any of the details pertaining to the document forged. He would further submit that the petitioner/accused published the exaggerated details regarding this investigation in a video on 24.10.2024 on his new You Tube channel Savukku Media Network.

5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent and perused the materials available on record. 6.Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 7.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the CMM Egmore, Chennai, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a separate 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 3/6

the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate 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 everyday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks and thereafter, on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.

[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 4/6

in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 26.11.2024 pam 5/6

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

pam CRL.OP.No.28854 of 2024 26.11.2024 6/6