Dismissed

Vinayagamoorthi v. State Rep by

Madras HC8 Oct 2021CRL OP/18441/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court rejected a plea for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a criminal case alleging obscene messaging, public nuisance, and sexual harassment against a widow. Deferring to the prosecution's case of threatened sexual acts and pending investigation.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail refused. Criminal Original Petition and connected miscellaneous petition dismissed.

Vinayagamoorthi Vs State Rep by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Friday, the Eighth day of October Two Thousand Twenty One

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.18441 of 2021

¶7

AND

¶8

CRL.MP.No.10475 OF 2021

¶9

VINAYAGAMOORTHI [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs

¶10

STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, NAGAPATTINAM DISTRICT. CR.NO.20 OF 2021.

¶11

For Petitioner : M/S. P.MUTHAMIZHSELVAKUMAR Advocate

¶12

For Respondent : MR. C.E.PRATAP, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶13

For Intervenor : MR. B.THIYAGARAJAN Advocate

¶14

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

¶15

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶16

The petitioner who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b), 509, 354(b) of Indian Penal Code 1882 r/w Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act in Cr.No.20 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶17

2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is a widow and had one female child and she lost her husband 1½ years back. Taking advantage of her loneliness, the petitioner had frequently sent obscene messages and photos to the defacto complainant's mobile phone and threatened the defacto complainant for his lust.

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a local president and already the defacto complainant had illegal intimacy with the rival president and the same was warned by the petitioner. Hence, the defacto complainant had lodged a false complaint against the petitioner.

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶20

The learned counsel for the intervenor submits that the defacto complainant is a widow and she is having one female child . The petitioner had continuously harassed the defacto complainant for his lust. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶21

The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) submits that investigation is pending.

¶22

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submissions made by both counsel and also the fact that that the petitioner is said to have threatened the defacto complainant and demanded for sexual affairs, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶23

Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶24

-sd/-

¶25

08/10/2021

¶26

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned

¶27

TRUE COPY

¶28

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

¶29

¶30

1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, NAGAPATTINAM DISTRICT.

¶31

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶32

+1 CC to M/S. P.MUTHAMIZHSELVAKUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.11355

¶33

CRL. OP.NO.18441/2021

¶34

AND

¶35

CRL.MP.No.10475 OF 2021

¶36

Date :08/10/2021

¶37

INBA-27/10/2021

¶38

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Vinayagamoorthi v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinayagamoorthi v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.S.Rajesh Vs State Rep by

Kala Vs the State Rep by

M.Balamurugan Vs State Rep by

T.S.Palaniswamy Vs Inspector of Police

Ajay Ponmany Vs Inspector of Police

Venkatesh Vs State Rep by