Jacqulin Angel v. State
In the High Court of Madras
Crl. MP (MD) 3752/2017
Before Justice Nisha Banu
Decided on August 1, 2017

Relevancy of the case: Cancellation of granted anticipatory bail in a case involving the creation of a fake Facebook account and posting of obscene photos.

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 66E, 67A)
• The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 294(b), 506 (ii), 307)
• The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 439(2))

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The petitioner lives with her mother and elder sister C. The two accused in the case are the owner of Augustine’s Real Estate Office, Augustine (A2) and his driver Charlin (Accused 1).
• C was working as an assistant staff at A2’s company and was sexually harassed by him on several occasions and asked to be his illegitimate wife. She left her job when the harassment became unbearable.
• A2 made a fake Facebook account of C and posted her picture portraying her as a prostitute. On the intimation of the profile from close friends, they registered an FIR under Section 66E and 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 294(b) and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
• After becoming aware of the complaint, A1 and A2 went to the petitioner’s house, threatened C to become his illegitimate wife and take back the complaint. On their refusal to comply, they attacked them with a knife and the petitioner’s mother suffered injuries.
• A2 was never arrested and A1, after being arrested, applied for two anticipatory bail requests, out of which one of them was declined due to severity of the crime and the second one was granted as the complainant was not aware that they could not intervene.
• Thus, the request to cancel the anticipatory bail is requested by the petitioner in the present application.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

• The petitioner’s counsel submitted that despite the anticipatory bail granted to A1, he did not choose to mend his activities and this attitude should be noted by the court.
• The respondent’s counsel submitted that the investigation in the matter is still pending.

Final Decision

• Petition allowed.
• Anticipatory bail cancelled.

As per one of our guidelines, we have removed certain information that falls under the category of personally identifiable information (PII). This guideline is available here.

This case summary has been prepared by Neelangini Tiwari, an undergraduate student at Kirori Mal College, DU, during her internship with The Cyber Blog India in January/February 2021.