MANOJKUMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 8/9/2022, for the offences punishable under Ss. 507 and 509 of IPC, Sec. 67 of Information Technology Act and Sec. 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.4 of 2021, on the file of the Respondent police, seeks bail.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, who is a senior of the defacto complainant in the college, by morphing had sent obscene photographs of the defacto complainant to her mobile phone, threatened her and thereby, caused harassment to her. Hence, the complaint.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are college mates and they are known to each other for sometime and due to some misunderstanding, a false complaint has been given as against the petitioner. He would further submit that after the arrest of the petitioner, his mobile phone has been recovered by the Respondent police and the petitioner was arrested only after a detailed investigation and there is no chances of the petitioner hampering with the investigation and tampering with the evidence. He would also submit that the petitioner after coming out of jail, is ready to file an affidavit of undertaking before the learned Judicial Magistrate that he will not interfere with the defacto complainant. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.