N.Sassikala v. State Rep. By Supdt Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 19.06.2017

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR Criminal Original Petition No. 2609 of 2001 and Crl.M.P.No.981 of 2001 N.Sassikala ... Petitioner/A-2 Vs

1. State represented by:

Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Chennai.

2. Mr.Subramanian Swamy No.1, Papanasam Sivan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004. ... Respondents (Impleaded as per the order of this Court dated 27.08.2002 made in Crl.M.P.No.8524 of 2002) Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C to set aside the order dated 02.02.2001 made by the XI Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge No.1, Chennai, made in the Memorandum of the Petition dated 05.01.2001. For Petitioner :

Mr.A.Navaneethakrishnan Senior Counsel for M/s.S. Venkatesh A. Kandasamy For First Respondent :

Mr.E. Raja, Additional Public Prosecutor For Second Respondent :

No Appearance

O R D E R

The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners would contend that the order of witness batta imposed by the trial court, to be paid by the petitioner to the witness is not in accordance with law. Hence, the order of trial Court is liable to be dismissed.

2. On perusal of the records it appears that when the accused filed an application to recall the witness P.W.232, the trial Court allowed the petition to recall the witness on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

payment of witness batta to the witness Mr. Subramania Swamy, leader of one of the political parties i.e., Janatha Party. The trial court has ordered the accused to pay Rs.7,900/- to the witness as witness batta.

3. As per the provision under Section 312 of Cr.P.C., that any criminal Court may subject to any rules made by the State Government, order payment on the part of Government, of the reasonable expenses of any witnesses attending court for the purpose of any trial, the trial Court ordered payment of cost. Further it is to be noted when the court witness has been recalled, the court taking into consideration of the status of the witness as contemplated under Section 411 of Criminal Rules of Practice, ordered the party to pay the cost of witness batta.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the main case itself disposed of by the Honourable Supreme Court and hence this petition, challenging the order of the XI Additional Sessions Judge, Special Judge-1, Chennai, is liable to be dismissed.

5. Considering the above, this Court is of the view that the learned trial Judge has observed the provisions contemplated under Section 312 of Criminal Procedure Code, as well as under Section 411 of Crimial Rules of Pactice, and ordered to pay reasonble witness batta to the witness and this court does not find any reason to interfere with the same. Hence, the Criminal Original Petition is liable to be dismissed.

6. In fine, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected M.P. is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS V) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ggs TO

1. XI Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge No.1, Chennai.

2. The Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Chennai.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. Crl. O.P. No. 2609 of 2001 and Crl.M.P.No.981 of 2001 GN(09/08/2017) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/