Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Tamil Nadu MLA M. Jagan Moorthy In Minor Abduction Case
The Supreme Courtroom granted anticipatory bail to Tamil Nadu MLA M. Jagan Moorthy in reference to a legal case involving the alleged abduction of a minor. The Madras Excessive Courtroom had earlier rejected his plea, holding that custodial interrogation was obligatory.
A Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh noticed, “…counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no such thing as a dispute that the abductee was recovered and never from the possession or management of the applicant… The matter requires consideration.”
Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra appeared for Moorthy.
Transient Information
M. Jagan Moorthy, a sitting Member of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Meeting, was arrested beneath Sections 189(2), 329(4), and 140(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, later altered to Sections 189(2), 332(b), 140(1), and 61(2).
It was alleged that Moorthy conspired within the abduction of a minor boy, the brother of a person who had eloped with a lady in opposition to her household’s needs. He was accused of offering males and autos to hint the couple, throughout which the minor boy was kidnapped and transported utilizing a authorities automobile allegedly organized by way of police entry.
The Madras Excessive Courtroom rejected Moorthy’s anticipatory bail software whereas observing, “Materials thus far collected signifies that the crime of abduction dedicated pursuant to the conspiracy during which the petitioner had actively participated and supplied his males for committing the crime.”
The Excessive Courtroom famous, “This Courtroom after perusing the CD file and noting the adversarial conduct of the petitioner and his associates… arrive at an irresistible conclusion that for truthful investigation and fearless trial, the petitioner should be secured and subjected to custodial interrogation.”
Earlier than the Supreme Courtroom, it was submitted on behalf of Moorthy that he was not present in possession or management of the minor, and even when any interplay had occurred, it was for settlement between events. It was argued that his implication was mala fide and custodial interrogation was pointless.
Reasoning of the Courtroom
Upon listening to the submissions the Bench noticed that the matter merited additional consideration.
The Courtroom recorded, “Discovered counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no such thing as a dispute that the abductee was recovered and never from the possession or management of the applicant. The applicant has been implicated for mala fide causes by alleging that he had a hand within the abduction. It has additionally been contended that even assuming that the applicant interacted with one of many events to the dispute, that could be thought-about for the needs of settling the problem. It has subsequent been contended that in any occasion no custodial interrogation is required.”
Contemplating the character of allegations, the submissions made, and the standing of the investigation, the Courtroom issued discover and granted anticipatory bail. It directed, “Within the meantime, if the petitioner is arrested in reference to FIR No.101/2025 registered at PS – Thiruvalangadu (renumbered as C.R. No.1/2025), he shall be launched on private bond of Rs.25,000/-, topic to the enterprise that he shall cooperate within the investigation and won’t threaten the witnesses or tamper the proof.”
Trigger Title: M. Jegan Moorthy v. The Inspector of Police (Particular Depart to Attraction (Crl.) No.9477/2025)
Look:
Petitioner: Senior Advocates Sidharth Luthra, S. Prabhakaran, Apurba Kumar Sharma; Advocates P S Amalraj, Muthuchharan Sundresh, Ma Gouthaman, M. Velmurugan, Usha Prabakaran, Maheswaran Prabakaran, Anuradha Arputham, M Naveen, R Senthil Kumar, G Jai Singh, Ram Sankar, Harini Ramsankar
