K.Ravikumar v. The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.11.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN Crl.O.P.No. 3020 of 2023 K.Ravi Kumar

...Petitioner / Accused

Vs.

1.

The Inspector of Police Chengalpattu Town Police Station, in Cr.No. 912 of 2021 U/s. 420 IPC ... Respondent/Complainant 2.

K.Vedavalli ... Respondent/ Defacto Complainant PRAYER:Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. praying to call for the records and set aside the order passed by the Hon'ble Judicial Magistrate No.I, Chengalpattu in Crl.M.P.No. 1486 of 2022 in Crl.M.P.No. 10842 of 2022.

*** For Petitioner : No appearance For 1st Respondent : Mr. S.Vinoth Raja Government Advocate, Crl. Side

For 2nd Respondent : No appearance

ORDER

There is no appearance on behalf of the petitioner.

2. Records reveal that even on 12.09.2023, there was no representation and again on 09.10.2023 and on 02.11.2023, there was no representation.

3. Application has been filed by the accused in Cr.No. 912 of 2021 registered under Section 420 IPC questioning an order by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Chengalpattu in Crl.M.P.No. 1486 of 2022. Earlier, the petitioner had filed Crl.M.P.No. 10842 of 2021 seeking bail and bail had been granted to the petitioner herein on condition that he should originally appear before the respondent everyday and thereafter it was modified to appear once a month. The condition had not been complied with by the petitioner herein.

4. Naturally, this would attract registration of the further FIR

under Section 229-A of IPC against the petitioner. Thereafter, the defacto complainant filed Crl.M.P.No. 1486 of 2022 to cancel the bail and the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Chengalpattu by an order dated 08.04.2022, had cancelled the bail. It had been very specifically observed by the learned Judicial Magistrate that the present petitioner had not paid any amount to the defacto complainant though it was so directed.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner is not also present. The petitioner had not complied with any of the condition under which he had been granted bail.

6. In view of these facts, the order cancelling bail is the proper step to be taken by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Chengalpattu. I find no infirmity in the order. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

vsg

7. The respondent is directed to take the petitioner into custody further.

21.11.2023 vsg To 1.

Judicial Magistrate No.I, Chengalpattu.

2.

The Inspector of Police Chengalpattu Town Police Station.

3.

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

Crl.O.P.No. 3020 of 2023