Prakash Alias Pillaiyar Prakash v. The State Of Tamil Nadu, Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08-10-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
1. Prakash Alias Pillaiyar Prakash S/o.Kathirvel, No.55, C Block, Poondithangammal Street, New Washermenpet, Chennai - 600 081.
Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by The Inspector of Police, H-5, New Washermenpet Police Station, Chennai.
Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Revision Case filed under section 438 r/w 442 of BNSS and under Section 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, prays to set aside the default bail application dismissal Order dated 14.08.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.5347 of 2025 passed by the learned Principal Special Judge Special Court Under EC and NDPS Act at Chennai connected with Cr.No.1501 of 2024 (On the file of Respondent Police) and thus render justice.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr. M.Illyas For Respondent(s):
Dr.C.E.Pratap Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The appellant has filed this revision to set aside the default bail application dismissal Order dated 14.08.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.5347 of 2025
passed by the learned Principal Special Judge Special Court Under EC and NDPS Act at Chennai connected with Cr.No.1501 of 2024 (On the file of Respondent Police).
2. Challenging the impugned order passed by the Trial Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge sheet was not filed within the statutory period and that the charge sheet filed was defective. Therefore, the petitioner claims entitlement to statutory (default) bail. However, the Trial Court failed to consider these aspects and erroneously dismissed the petition. Aggrieved by the said findings, the present revision has been filed.
3. Per contra, the prosecution raised objections, contending that before the completion of the statutory period, an application was filed before the Trial Court seeking extension of time for filing the final report, and the same was allowed. Pursuant to the extension granted, the final report was filed within the extended period, and the case was taken on file. The learned Trial Judge has rightly considered these facts, and the order passed does not warrant any interference.
4. The submissions made on either side and the order passed by the Trial Court have been carefully perused. It is evident from the records that the
prosecution had obtained an extension of time to complete the investigation. Accordingly, time was extended by the Trial Court, and within the extended period, the prosecution completed the investigation and filed the final report. The total period granted for investigation was 240 days from the date of remand of A1 and 175 days from the date of remand of A2. Within the said period, the prosecution filed the final report on 28.07.2025.
5. In view of the above, the charge sheet was filed within the prescribed and extended time, and therefore, the claim of statutory bail sought by the petitioner is not sustainable. Apart from this, it is also brought to the notice of the Court that the petitioner is involved in 11 previous criminal cases, out of which three are murder cases and four cases are under Section 397 IPC. Hence, the order passed by the Trial Court does not warrant any interference.
6. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as devoid of merits.
08-10-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes rri
To 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by The Inspector of Police, H-5, New Washermenpet Police Station, Chennai.
2. The Principal Special Judge Special Court Under EC and NDPS Act, Chennai.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai
T.V.THAMILSELVI J.
rri CRL RC No. 1695 of 08-10-2025