Salem Dansar Karthi @ Karthick v. The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twenty Ninth day of May Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL OP(MD) No.7571 of 2019 SALEM DANSAR KARTHI @ KARTHICK RAMALINGAM ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED No.2 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NAVALPATTU POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT.

Crime No.44/2019 ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : Mr.A.ANANDA RAJ Advocate For Respondent : Mr.R.ANANDARAJ, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.2, was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 12.04.2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 342, 420, 506(i), 386, 395 and 120(b) IPC in Crime No.44 of 2019, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with his friends demanded some amount from the defacto complainant threatening him as if they will release the obscene video of the defacto complainant taken by them through internet. Thus, on complaint, a case has been registered against the petitioner for the above said offences.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution and his name has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 12.04.2019. Hence, he prays for bail. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State submitted that as of now, investigation is pending.

5.The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side are considered.

6.It is alleged that at the time of occurrence, the petitioner took nude photograph of the defacto complainant and thereafter, after showing the same, the petitioner demanded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-. So the offence committed by the petitioner is nothing but very serious one. Hence, I am of the opinion that if this type of accused is enlarged on bail, there may be a chance for tampering the witnesses and hampering the investigation. Hence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 29/05/2019 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NAVALPATTU POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT.

2.THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON, TRICHY.

3.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to Mr.A.ANANDA RAJ Advocate SR.No.8981

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.7571 of 2019 Date :29/05/2019 TK/MMS/SAR-4/30.05.2019/2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/