G.Subramaniam v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN in Crl.O.P.No.38 of 2012 G.Subramaniam

...Petitioner

-vs1.State Rep. By The Inspector of Police, Crime Branch CID, Namakkal.

2.K.Subramani (A3) 3.Natanasapabath (A7)

...Respondents

PRAYER : Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 483(3) of BNSS, 2023, praying to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to respondents 2 and 3 / accused A3 and A7 vide order dated 11.01.2012 in Crl.O.P.No.38 of 2012.

For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Kolandasamy For R1 : Mr.P.Dhileepan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 & R3 : Mr.C.S.Saravanan 1/4

ORDER

This petition has been filed to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to respondents 2 and 3 / accused A3 and A7 vide order dated 11.01.2012 in Crl.O.P.No.38 of 2012.

2. The main ground urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner is the wrong reference to the name of the respondent police while filing the anticipatory bail application. In this regard, the learned counsel relied upon the proceedings of the Superintendent of Police, Namakkal District, dated 14.02.2009. On a close reading of the said letter, the Superintendent of Police, Namakkal District, issued proceedings to transfer the case registered before the Pallipalayam Police Station to the District Crime Branch. Though in the anticipatory bail order, the District Crime Branch is referred, it has been mentioned as Crime District Branch, CID, Namakkal. In this regard, it is appropriate to refer that the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) had appeared for the first respondent and made submissions before the Court and only considering his submission the bail was granted.

3. Therefore, this Court is of the firm view that, even assuming for the sake of argument that a wrong police station has been referred to, the same 2/4

would in no way prejudice the case of the petitioner, as the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), on instructions from the police authorities, has effectively represented the State. Hence, this Court does not find any material to cancel the anticipatory bail at this length of time on the ground of wrong reference to the police station.

4. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition stands dismissed. 02.04.2026 cda To 1.The Inspector of Police, Crime Branch CID, Namakkal.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

cda in Crl.O.P.No.38 of 2012 02.04.2026 4/4