Kannan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 04.03.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2487 of 2019 Kannan .. Petitioner/Defacto Complainant Vs 1.State Rep by its The Inspector of Police, Thadikombu Police Station, Dindigul, (Crime No.11/2019) ..1st Respondent/1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Viji @ Vijaya Rahavan 3.Hariharan 4.Pradeep 5.Surya 6.Siva 7.Manikandan 8.Rajesh 9.Karthick 10.Kabil 11.Ponnar .. Respondent2 to 11/Accused 1 to 10 Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C., to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the respondents 2 to 11/ accused persons in connection with Crime No.11 of 2019, by the Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul vide order dated 30.01.2019 in Crl.M.P.No.211 of 2019.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sukumar For R-1 : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

This petition has been filed seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the respondents 2 to 11/ accused persons in Crime No.11 of 2019, by the Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul, vide order dated 30.01.2019 in Crl.M.P.No.211 of 2019. 2.On an earlier occasion, the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul, granted anticipatory bail to the accused persons, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 506(ii), 307 of IPC and Section 3(1) of TNPPDL Act, in Crime No.11 of 2019, on the file of the first respondent police. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner/de-facto complainant submitted that there is violation of the condition imposed in the petition for anticipatory bail by the learned Principal Sessions https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Judge, Dindigul. The learned counsel for the petitioner/de-facto complainant further submitted that though steps are taken to file an appropriate petition for changing the Section registered by the Law Enforcing Agency, without considering the fact that some of the accused persons are taking treatment and without considering the previous case against the accused persons, the trial Court granted anticipatory bail to them.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the State would submit that there is no violation of the conditions imposed by the trial Court and injured persons have already been discharged from the hospital.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that there is no violation of the condition imposed by the trial Court, it is open to the petitioner to work out his remedy before the trial Court, in the manner known to law.

6.In view of the above, the petition for cancellation of anticipatory bail does not arise. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AD-I) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul.

2.The Inspector of Police, Thadikombu Police Station, Dindigul, 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2487 of 2019 04.03.2019 SP/29.03.2019/ 2P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/