S.R.Chandrasekaran v. The Inspector Of Police
CRL OP(MD). No.18664 of 2022 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 19/10/2022 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice A.A.NAKKIRAN CRL OP(MD). No.18664 of 2022 S.R.Chandrasekaran ... Petitioner/ Accused Rank not known Vs The State rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Thiruthangal Police Station, Virudhunagar District.
Crime No. 250 of 2022.
... Respondent For Petitioner : M/s.Rajasekar G, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.M. Muthumanikkam, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.250 of 2022 on the file of the respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 295(A), 505(1)(c), 509 IPC, 1860 and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998 r/w. Section 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000 in Crime No.250 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused illegally spreading rumors about the defacto complainant, that she is having illegal affairs with church Pastor viz., durai through Whatsapp messages and You Tube Chennal to damage the name of the reputation of the Church. Hence, a case has been registered.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/2
CRL OP(MD). No.18664 of 2022
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is senior citizen and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner is innocent and his name has been falsely implicated in this case.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that petitioner herein is arrayed as A4 and the co accused viz., A1 and A2 have already been arrested and remanded to judicial custody and the A3 is absconding. He would further submit that A2 is the husband of A1 and the accused persons have sent the unwanted messages through Whats app and You Tube Channel to damage the name of the defacto complainant. He further contended that the investigation of the case is pending and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary and he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Considering the serious nature of allegations made against the petitioner and also the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 19/10/2022 / TRUE COPY / /10/2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
trp TO 1.The Inspector of Police, Thiruthangal Police Station, Virudhunagar District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1 CC to M/s.G.RAJASEKAR, Advocate ( SR-11786[I] dated 20/10/2022 )
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.18664 of 2022 Date :19/10/2022 RK/SSS/SAR-1 (31/10/2022) 2P/4C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2