S.Banu v. The State By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02.07.2015

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH Crl.O.P. Nos.2045 & 2046 of 2014 S. Banu .. Petitioner Vs.

1. The State, by Inspector of Police, Chengalpet Town Police Station, Chengalpet.

..1st respondent in both Crl.O.Ps.

Nagaraj .. 2nd RespondentCrl.O.P.

No.2045 of 2014(Accused) Pugazhenthi .. 2nd Respondent in Crl.O.P.No.2046/2014(Accused) Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C., to cancel the bail granted to the 2nd respondent in Crl.M.P.Nos.291 and 290 of 2013 dated 29.4.2013 respectively by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court at Chengalpet. For Petitioner : Mr.K.C.Karl Marx For Respondent : Mr.M. Mohamed Riyaz Govt. Advocate (Crl.side) for R1 Mr. T.R. Ravi for R2

O R D E R

These petitions are filed for cancellation of bail granted to the 2nd respondents herein in Crl.M.P.Nos.291 and 290 of 2013 on 29.4.2013 respectively by the learned District Mahila Judge at Chengalpet.

2. On 15.4.2013, this Court, by order made in Crl.O.P.Nos.5200 and 5201 of 2013 dismissed the anticipatory bail applications moved by the 2nd respondent herein in Crl.O.P.Nos.2045 and 2046 of 2014 and further directed the petitioners/2nd respondents herein to surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned and file appropriate application for bail and on filing such application, the trial court can consider the same on merits and in accordance with law. Accordingly, the petitioners therein/2nd respondent filed a bail petition before the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chengalpattu and obtained bail on 29.4.2013. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. Now the present petitions have been filed for cancellation of bail granted by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chengalpattu in Crl.M.P.Nos. 291 and 290 of 2013 dated 29.4.2013 .

4. The only submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the 2nd respondent herein in both the Crl.O.Ps., are tampering the witnesses, however, the learned Government Advocate (crl.side) submitted that on completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed in S.C.No.1 of 2013 and now the case is pending before the learned Mahila Court, Chengalpattu.

5. Considering the submissions of both sides, since on completion of investigation, final report has been filed in S.C.No.1 of 2013 and the case is pending for trial before the learned Mahila Court, Chengalpattu, I am of the opinion, nothing survives in the prayer made in these Criminal Original Petitions. Hence both these Petitions are dismissed.

msr s/dAssistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To

1. The Sessions Judge, Mahila Court at Chengalpet.

2. -do- thro'The Principal Sessions Judge, Kancheepuram.

3. The Inspector of Police,Chengalpet Town Police Station, Chengalpet.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. + 2 ccs to Mr.T.R.Ravi, Advocate, SRs 12427 & 12428 sv(co) prk22/7 Crl.O.P. Nos.2045 & 2046 of 2014 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/