Primo Automations Systems (P) v. State Rep.By The Inspector Of

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 9.7.2015

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH Crl.O.P. No.4065 of 2014 Primo Automation Systems (P) Ltd., represented by P. Rajagopalan, its Managing Director, having office at Flat F-1, Block 1, Gokul Gardens, 182 Trunk Road, Porur, Chennai 600 116. .. Petitioner Vs.

1. State, represented by the Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Chennai.

2. Sukash Chandrasekhar @ Balaji .. Respondents(Complainant and Accused) Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439(ii) of Cr.P.C., praying to cancel the bail order passed by the Fast Track Court No.1, (in charge of Judicial Magistrate-I), Alandur in Crl.M.P.No.112 of 2014 and direct the remand of the accused for judicial custody.

For Petitioner : M/s.K.P.Anantha Krishna For Respondent : Mr. Mohammed Riyaz Govt. Advocate (Crl.side)for R1 Mr.M.K. Raja for R2

O R D E R

This application has been filed to cancel the bail granted to the accused in Crl.M.P.No.112 of 2014 by the learned Magistrate, Fast Track Court No.1 (incharge of Judicial Magistrate I), Alandur and further direct to remand the accused/2nd respondent under judicial custody.

2. This petition has been filed mainly on the ground that the petitioner has not complied with the condition imposed on the 2nd respondent/accused by the learned Judicial Magistrate I, Alandur, while granting bail in Crl.M.P.112 of 2014.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the accused was enlarged on bail on condition the executing two relative sureties on executing a bond, each bond for a sum of Rs.50 lakhs with two genuine sureties, one must be blood relative and the accused shall report before the police daily at two times morning and evening till filing of the charge sheet before the Court and on further condition that the accused shall not leave the Tamilnadu. He further submitted that the accused has not complied with the above said conditions imposed by the court below. Hence he prayed for cancelation of bail granted to the accused.

4. Learned Government Advocate (crl.side)/2nd respondent submitted that the petitioner has failed to comply with the conditions imposed by the court below.

5.Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Advocate (crl.side), I am of the opinion, the bail granted to the accused is liable to be cancelled.

6. Accordingly, the bail granted to the accused in Crl.M.P.No.112 of 2014 by the learned Judicial Magistrate -I (incharge), Fast Track Court No.1, Alandur on 9.1.2014 is hereby stands cancelled.

7. This petition is ordered accordingly.

msr s/dAssistant Registrar(CS-III) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To

1. The Fast Track Court No.1, (in charge of Judicial Magistrate-I), Alandur

2. -do- thro'The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kancheepuram.

3. The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Chennai.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras sv(co) prk22/7 Crl.O.P. No.4065 of 2014 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/