Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/2269/2018disposed of

S. Karupasamy v. The Superintendent Of Police

2018-02-23Honourable Mr Justice P. Rajamanickam2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.02.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2269 of 2018 S.Karupasamy ... Petitioner/Complainant -Vs1.The Superintendant of Police, Virudhunagar District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Aruppukkottai Taluk Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

... Respondents/Respondents 3.A.V.K.Adaikalarajan ... Respondent/Accused Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the 2nd respondent to execute the non-bailable warrant dated 21.09.2017 pending against the 3rd respondent in S.T.C.No. 41 of 2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District, within stipulated time fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner :Mr.S.Ayyanar Prem Kumar For Respondents :Mr.Prabu Ramachandran Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R.1 and R.2

O R D E R

This petition has been filed to direct the second respondent to execute the non-bailable warrant which was issued against the third respondent in S.T.C.No. 41 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner herein has filed a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act,1881, against the third respondent herein and based on the said complaint, the case was taken on file in S.T.C.No.41 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.

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

3.He further submitted that after receipt of the summons, the third respondent did not appear. Hence, a non-bailable warrant has been issued on 21.09.2017, but, so far, the second respondent has not executed the said warrant and hence, he requests this Court to give a suitable direction to the second respondent, for executing the non-bailable warrant at early.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) has submitted that a special team has been constituted for executing the nonbailable warrant and he requests to grant some more time for executing the non-bailable warrant.

5.Considering the aforesaid submissions, the second respondent is directed to take effective steps to execute the warrant which has been issued against the third respondent at early, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6.With the aforesaid directions, this criminal original petition is disposed of.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AS) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Superintendant of Police, Virudhunagar District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Aruppukkottai Taluk Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

+1CC TO Mr.S.Ayyanar Prem Kumar, Advocate, Sr No.50759 Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2269 of 2018 23.02.2018 gsp MS/CM/SAR.4/23.02.2018/2P.5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/