Sobin v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Twenty Ninth day of April Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Dr Justice G. JAYACHANDRAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION Nos.10300 to 10304, 10306, 10307 and 10309 of 2022 IN C.C.Nos.9685, 9689, 9686, 9691, 9687, 9688, 9690 and 9684 of 2014 (On the file of Learned V Metropolitan Magistrate at Egmore, Chennai) SOBIN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED IN ALL THE PETITIONS ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT INSPECTOR OF POLICE, IN ALL THE PETITIONS ] K7, ICF POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

CRIME NO.55 OF 2010.

For Petitioner : M/S. M.DEIVANANDAM Advocate [IN ALL THE PETITIONS] For Respondent : M/S.G.V.KASTHURI, Additional public Prosecutor [IN ALL THE PETITIONS] PETITIONS FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who were arrested for the offence under section 420 read with 34 of IPC in Crime No.55 of 2010, seek to release them on bail in C.C.Nos.9685, 9689, 9686, 9691, 9687, 9688, 9690 and 9684 of 2014 respectively pending on the file of the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.

2.The petitioners herein, who have jumped bail after suo motu bail granted by this Court in the week of covid pandemic situation, has not reported before the Court causing delay in the completion of the trial of a case, which was registered in the year 2010. The trial court, after considering the conduct of these petitioners herein, has dismissed their bail petitions.

3.Now, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent states that after securing the petitioners, the trial has commenced and three witnesses so far have been examined. 4.Learned counsel for the petitioners would state that they are ready to abide by any condition and they may be granted bail so as to instruct their counsel for conducting their case.

5. Though normally the court is inclined to grant bail for an accused person who have to instruct counsels to defend him, it is a case, which is peculiar and chequered history pending before the Court for more than 21 years. When anticipatory bail was granted to these petitioners on conditions, they failed to comply with the conditions. When they were released on bail during the covid situation with the condition that they should report before the Court soon after the lockdown, they did not turn up to participate in the trial. In such circumstances, after due consideration of his conduct, the trial court has dismissed the bail petitions and only after securing them, there is also progress in the trial of these cases to complete the trial. Hence, the custody of these petitioners are necessary.

If they need to give any instruction to their counsel, the Prison Authorities may facilitate the same to them. Further, the trial court is directed to complete the trial probably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The respondent police is directed to marshal the witnesses on every hearing date without fail and complete the trial within the period mentioned above.

With the above observation, all these criminal original petitions for bail are dismissed.

-sd/- 29/04/2022 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, NO.V, EGMORE, CHENNAI 2 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, K7, ICF POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

4 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL, CHENNAI- 600 066 5 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+2 CC to M/S. M.DEIVANANDAM Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.6540 Crl.O.P.Nos.10300 to 10304, 10306, 10307 and 10309 of 2022 Date :29/04/2022 JPA 06/05/2022