Madras High CourtCRL MP(MD)/2648/2017dismissed

Sivasubramanian v. Malairaj

2017-06-13Honourable Mrs Justice J. Nisha Banu2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Thirteenth day of June Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs.Justice J.NISHA BANU CRL MP(MD) No.2648 of 2017 IN CRL OP(MD) No.2840 of 2017 SIVASUBRAMANIAN ... PETITIONER / DEFACTO COMPLAINANT Vs 1 MALAIRAJ 2 KARTHIKEYAN ... 1st & 2nd RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED Nos.1&2 3 STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUVEGAMPATHUR POLICE STATION, DEVAKOTTAI TALUK, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT (CRIME NO.22 OF 2017) ... 3rd RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to cancel the Anticipatory Bail order issued by this Honourable Court in Crime No. 22 of 2017 on the file of the 3rd Respondent Police in Crl.O.P.(MD).No. 2840 of 2017 dated 15.03.

2017 Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.R.MURUGAN, Advocate for the petitioner and of Mr.A.RAMAR, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent, the court made the following order:- The petitioner / defacto complainant has come up with this petition seeking to cancel the anticipatory bail order, dated 15.03.2017, granted by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2840 of 2017 in favour of the respondents 1 and 2 /A1 and A2. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that when the matter came up for hearing on 15.03.2017, the defacto complainant was taking treatment as inpatient in the hospital.

But, due to misrepresentation of the learned Government Advocate that the petitioner is taking treatment in the hospital as outpatient, this Court has granted anticipatory bail in favour of the respondents 1 and 2. In view of the grant of anticipatory bail, the respondents 1 and 2 would not co-operate with the enquiry, tamper with the evidences and hamper the investigation. Therefore, the said order is liable to be cancelled.

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

3. When the matter came up for hearing on 20.04.2017, this Court directed the learned Government Advocate to file charge sheet forthwith and report the same. Today, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the third respondent/ Police submitted that the charge sheet has been filed in this case and the same is yet to be taken on file by the learned Magistrate.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances and also considering the latest development, this Court is of the view that no purpose would be served in cancelling the anticipatory bail order, dated 15.03.2017. Hence, this petition is dismissed. sd/- 13/06/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DEVAKOTTAI.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIVAGANGAI.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUVEGAMPATHUR POLICE STATION, DEVAKOTTAI TALUK, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. C.C. to Mr.S.MANIKANDAN, Advocate SR.No.60074 JAM/22.06.17/KK/SAR 2 / 2P-6C

ORDER

IN CRL MP(MD) No.2648 of 2017 IN CRL OP(MD) No.2840 of 2017 Date :13/06/2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/