Blog

Madras High Court

In this case AIADMK minister got arrested after the complaint got filed against him by a Malaysian Women to whom the minister had promised to marry and was in a relationship with her for 5 years. The petitioner was charged for Section 417, 376, 313, 323 and 506(i) of IPC and Section 67-A of the IT Act, 2000.  The case was Dr. M. Manikandan V/S State Rep. by The Inspector of Police W-19, All Women Police Station, Adyar Crl.O.P.No.11282 of 2021. The complainant of this case was Malaysian women and the petitioner in the high court was minister. The case was presided in Madras High Court by Mr. Justice M. Nirmal Kumar .

Facts of the case

• In this case the complainant was Malaysian women who was employed in the Malaysian Tourism Department and Corporation and because of her employment she had to visit frequently. In 2017, she met with the AIADMK minister of Tamil Nadu and they both had exchanged their contact no. with each other. After sometime minister told the complainant that he was interested in starting a business in Malaysia & because of that reason both started to meet frequently. After some time petitioner told to the complainant that he was interested in her and told her that he loves her. Initially complainant refused to him but later when petitioner told her that he is unhappy with his marriage and wants to be her so she gave in to him.
• Both started to live-in-relationship as husband and wife and also established a physical relationship. During that time the complainant also got pregnant 3 times but the petitioner by force aborted the pregnancy. Many witnesses were also there to confirm that both were living as husband and wife. Petitioner with the help of his one Doctor friend put the Copper-T in the complainant’s body to avoid the further pregnancy. Defacto complainant frequently ask the petitioner to marry her but he refused to it.
• The petitioner also blackmailed complainant by saying that he will leak her intimate photos on internet if she will go against him. He said that he will also portray her character as a character less women. After all this happened the complainant filed the case against him.
• The learned counsel for the petitioner said that as the complainant was well aware of about the petitioner’s marriage and of the fact that petitioner family is continuously opposing there relationship. He also stated that complainant is a graduate women whose age is 37(at the time of the proceeding) is mature enough and she herself gave the consent for the relationship either physical or emotional. There is clear distinction between the rape and consensual rape.
• The petitioner applied for the Aniticipatory Bail in High Court wich got rejected by the court.

JUDGMENT

The Madras High Court inclined the bail of petitioner by giving following conditions:-

• The petitioner is allowed to be released on the bail by paying the Sum Rs.10,000/- before the supritendent of the concerned.
• The petitioner shall execute two sureties for sum of Rs.10,000/- each before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai within a period of 15 days, if failing to do so bail granted by the court shall be considered as dismissed. The sureties will affix their photos and thumb impression in the surety bond to the learned Magistrate with the copy of Aadhar card or Bank pass book.
• After release the petitioner will regularly report before the respondent police foe the period of 2 weeks daily at 10.30 A.M. and after that he must come if the interrogation requires his presence.
• Also, petitioner will submit his passport and if passport is not available the a affidavit which will say that petitioner will not be doing any such offence of similar nature, if will cooperate for investigation and trial and will not tamper with witnesses or evidences and found by doing so then the learned magistrate can take action against him.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY NAMRATA SINGH

Click here to your judgment