Muniraj v. The Sub Divisional Executive Magistrate Cum Sub-Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.04.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Criminal Revision Case No.201 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.1513 of 2025 Muniraj ... Petitioner S/o.Ramakrishnappa ..vs..

1. The Sub Divisional Executive Magistrate -cum-Sub-Collector, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

2. State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, Kelamangalam Police Station, Krishnagiri District, Crime No.13 of 2025.

... Respondents Criminal Revision Case filed under Sections 438 read with 442 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the entire records pertaining to the detention order passed by the learned Sub Divisional Executive Magistrate-cumSub-Collector, Krishnagiri District in C.No.481/2024/B4 vide order dated 21.01.2025 and set aside the same as illegal and consequently set the petitioner at liberty forthwith.

Page No.1/6

For Petitioner : No appearance For Respondents : Mr.S.Sugendran Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This Criminal Revision Petition is preferred against the detention order passed by the Sub Divisional Executive Magistrate-cum-SubCollector, Krishnagiri District in C.No.481/2024/B4 dated 21.01.2025 and consequently set the petitioner at liberty forthwith.

2. It is seen from the records that the petitioner executed a bail bond on 23.12.2024 under Section 129 of the BNSS, 2023 to maintain good behaviour and peace for a period one year. During the said bond period, the second respondent-Police registered a case in Crime No.13 of 2025 as against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 126(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023 and he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 18.01.2025. The first respondent, after enquiry, passed the impugned order dated 21.01.2025 and cancelled the bail bond and the petitioner was subjected to continue his judicial custody Page No.2/6

till expiry of bail bond i.e., 23.12.2025. Challenging the said impugned order, the petitioner is before this Court.

3. There is no representation for the petitioner.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents submitted that only after providing sufficient opportunity, the petitioner was produced before the first respondent for enquiry and during the enquiry, the petitioner himself admitted the alleged offences and that the first respondent cancelled the bail bond and committed the accused into custody.

5. Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.

6. On a perusal of the records it is seen that during the bond period since the petitioner was involved in some other case, the first respondent after due enquiry, cancelled the bail bond and committed the accused into custody.

Page No.3/6

7. Considering the facts and circumstances and also considering the submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, this Court does not find any perversity or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the first respondent. As there is no merit in the revision, the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 09.04.2025 Index: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order ms Page No.4/6

To

1. The Sub Divisional Executive Magistrate -cum-Sub-Collector, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Kelamangalam Police Station, Krishnagiri District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

4.The Superintendent of Prison, District Jail, Dharmapuri District.

Page No.5/6

P.VELMURUGAN, J.

ms 09.04.2025 Page No.6/6