Madras High CourtCRL OP/31716/2019closed

Amala v. Ramya

2020-01-20Honourable Mr Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twentieth day of January Two Thousand Twenty PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.31716 of 2019 IN CRL.OP.NO.189 OF 2019 AMALA [ PETITIONER / PETITIONER ] Vs 1 RAMYA [ 1ST RESPONDENT / PETITIONER / ACCUSED] 2 STATE REP.BY [ 2ND RESPONDENT / THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, 1ST RESPONDENT ] W8 ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, THIRUMANGALAM, CHENNAI-600 037.

CR.NO.20 OF 2018.

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to cancel the anticipatory bail order dated 07.01.2019 made in Crl.OP.No.189 of 2019 on the file of this Hon'ble Court for willfully violating the conditions imposed therein.

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.N.MANOHARAN, Advocate for the petitioner and of M/S.A.SARAVANAN, Advocate on behalf of the 1st Respondent/Petitioner/Accused and of M/S.ARULMOZHIMARAN, Government Advocate (crl.side) on behalf of the 2nd Respondent/1st Respondent the court made the following order:- This criminal original petition has been filed to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the 1st respondent in Crl.O.P.No.189 of 2019 dated 07.01.2019 on the ground that the first respondent was granted Anticipatory Bail on condition that she shall appear before the second respondent on summons under Section 160 of Cr.P.C., specifying particular date and time for appearance for investigation.

2. Even after receipt of summons, she did not appear before the second respondent. It is also seen that the first respondent received summons issued by the second respondent and she did not appear before the second respondent and also she challenged the said summon issued by the second respondent before this Court as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and both the petitions were dismissed. Now on the direction issued by this Court, the first respondent appeared before the second respondent for investigation, which is still under progress.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. Considering the above facts and circumstances, the cancellation of Anticipatory Bail petition cannot be entertained at this stage. Hence, the Crl.O.P.No.31716 of 2019 is dismissed. However, the first respondent is directed to appear before the second respondent as and when required for the investigation under section 160 of Cr.P.C in Crime No. 20 of 2018 without fail. -sd/- 20/01/2020 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 ADDITIONAL MAHILA MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, W8 ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, THIRUMANGALAM, CHENNAI-600 037.

CC to M/S.N.MANOHARAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.31716/2019 IN CRL.OP.189/2019 Date :20/01/2020 cs 03/02/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/