Justice Manoj Misra, Justice N. Kotiswar Singh, M. Jagan Moorthy
Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Tamil Nadu MLA M. Jagan Moorthy In Minor Abduction Case
|M. Jagan Moorthy was accused of facilitating the abduction of a minor boy by arranging men and vehicles amid a family dispute involving an eloped couple.
The Supreme Court granted anticipatory bail to Tamil Nadu MLA M. Jagan Moorthy in connection with a criminal case involving the alleged abduction of a minor. The Madras High Court had earlier rejected his plea, holding that custodial interrogation was necessary.
A Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh observed, “…counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no dispute that the abductee was recovered and not from the possession or control of the applicant... The matter requires consideration.”
Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra appeared for Moorthy.
Brief Facts
M. Jagan Moorthy, a sitting Member of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly, was arrested under 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 in the abduction of a minor boy, the brother of a man who had eloped with a woman against her family’s wishes. He was accused of providing men and vehicles to trace the couple, during which the minor boy was abducted and transported using a government vehicle allegedly arranged through police access.
The Madras High Court rejected Moorthy’s anticipatory bail application while observing, “Material so far collected indicates that the crime of abduction committed pursuant to the conspiracy in which the petitioner had actively participated and provided his men for committing the crime.”
The High Court noted, “This Court after perusing the CD file and noting the adverse conduct of the petitioner and his associates… arrive at an irresistible conclusion that for fair investigation and fearless trial, the petitioner need to be secured and subjected to custodial interrogation.”
Before the Supreme Court, it was submitted on behalf of Moorthy that he was not found in possession or control of the minor, and even if any interaction had occurred, it was for settlement between parties. It was argued that his implication was mala fide and custodial interrogation was unnecessary.
Reasoning of the Court
Upon hearing the submissions the Bench observed that the matter merited further consideration.
The Court recorded, “Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no dispute that the abductee was recovered and not from the possession or control of the applicant. The applicant has been implicated for mala fide reasons by alleging that he had a hand in the abduction. It has also been contended that even assuming that the applicant interacted with one of the parties to the dispute, that may be considered for the purposes of settling the issue. It has next been contended that in any event no custodial interrogation is required.”
Considering the nature of allegations, the submissions made, and the status of the investigation, the Court issued notice and granted anticipatory bail. It directed, “In the meantime, if the petitioner is arrested in connection with FIR No.101/2025 registered at PS – Thiruvalangadu (renumbered as C.R. No.1/2025), he shall be released on personal bond of Rs.25,000/-, subject to the undertaking that he shall cooperate in the investigation and will not threaten the witnesses or tamper the evidence.”
Cause Title: M. Jegan Moorthy v. The Inspector of Police (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9477/2025)
Appearance:
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