Salem Dansar Karthi @ v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 14/06/2019 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice P.RAJAMANICKAM CRL OP(MD). No.8238 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.

Cr.No.44 of 2019.

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.A.Ananda Raj, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.V. Neelakandan, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.439 Cr.P.C.

PRAYER :- For bail petition in cr.no.44 of 2019 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- This petition has been filed by the petitioner/ sole accused seeking bail for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b), 323,342,420,506(i), 386,395 and 120(b) of IPC.

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 for the petitioner would submit the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the above case. He further submitted that the entire allegations is only against the first accused. He further submitted that due to money dispute the petitioner has been implicated in the above case. He was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 12.04.2019 and he is in custody for the 53 days. Hence he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the petitioner and five others criminally intimidated the defacto complainant to give pose to the videos in nude manner along with another lady and the same was recorded by some other accused and thereafter blackmailing the defacto complainant the petitioner demanded Rs.5,00,000/- and thereafter the defacto complainant transferred Rs.1,00,000/- to the bank account of the first accused. He further submitted that the investigation is still pending. Hence he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner. He would also submit that earlier application filed by the petitioner in Crl.O.P(MD)7571 of 2019 was dismissed on 29.05.2019 and thereafter there is no change in facts and circumstances of the case for entertaining the second bail application.

5. Taking into consideration the serious allegations levelled against the petitioner and also there is no change in facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact the defacto complainant has transferred a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to the account of the first accused, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Hence this bail petition is dismissed.

sd/- 14/06/2019 / 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 SUPERINDENTENT, CENTRAL PRISON, TRICHY. 3.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.8238 of 2019 Date :14/06/2019 aav AE/JC/SAR-II (20.06.2019) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/