Balaji v. State Rep By

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

The petitioner , who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.07.2022 for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b) and 302 I.P.C. in Crime No.756 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police pending trial in S.C. No.53 of 2017 on the file of learned III Addl. District and Sessions Judge at Poonamallee, seeks bail.

2. It is a case of jumped bail. The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.07.2022 pursuant to the non-bailable warrant issued against him.

3. The learned counsel appearing for petitioner would submit that the petitioner was earlier granted bail and thereafter, he was regularly appearing before the trial Court. On 21.11.2021, he was unable to appear before the Court and subsequently, the learned Magistrate issued non bailable warrant against the petitioner following which, the petitioner was

arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.07.2022. He would submit that since he was in prison, he was arrested and produced by way of PT warrant on 05.07.2022 and remanded to judicial custody. He would submit that on 16.02.2023, P.W.1 was examined and the matter was posted for cross-examination of other witnesses on 06.03.2023. The petitioner is ready to close the cross-examination within three months and he is languishing in prison for more than 210 days from 05.07.2022. He would submit that he is ready to appear before the Court regularly and to co-operate for the trial. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that the petitioner is absconding for more than one year and thereafter, after hectic efforts, he was secured only on 05.07.2022. He would further submit that there are 20 previous cases including 3 murder cases and two cases under Sec.307 of I.P.C. pending against the petitioner. He would submit that after securing him, the trial was begin and already P.W.1 to 13 were examined and another five more witnesses are yet to be examined. He would submit that they will complete

the trial within three months and only after securing the petitioner, the trial was began. Hence, if he is released on bail, there is possibility of hampering the investigation. Therefore, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances and on considering submissions of both side counsels and on considering the fact that he was arrested on 05.07.2022 in pursuant to non-bailable warrant and after securing him, the trial was begin, so far, P.W.1 to 13 were examined and 5 more witnesses are yet to be examined and if he is released on bail, he may abscond and he would tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation and also there is no change of circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

21.03.2023 rpp

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

rpp 21.03.2023