Sarath @ Rengaraj v. State Of Tamilnadu, Rep. By Its The Superintendent Of Police,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.08.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI and W.P.M.P.Crl.(MD)No.156 of 2025 Sarath @ Rengaraj ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police, District Police Office, Thanjavur District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Vattathikottai Police Station, Thanjavur District.
(In Crime No.550 of 2021) 3.Deleted ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to recall the Lookout circular issued against the petitioner based on the representation dated 25.06.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.L.Muthuramalingam For R1 & R2 : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor R3-Deleted.
1/6
ORDER
The petitioner, who is the accused in S.S.C.No.7 of 2023 on the file of the Special Court for POCSO Act Cases, Thanjavur, has filed this petition seeking a direction to the respondent Police to recall the lookout circular issued as against him by considering his representation dated 25.06.2025.
2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has unnecessarily added the third respondent as a party to this petition and no relief has been made as against the third respondent. Therefore, he is not pressing this application as against the third respondent. In view of the same, the third respondent is deleted. 3.The petitioner was granted bail in Cr.M.P.No.904 of 2021 by order dated 10.12.2021 and the condition imposed in the said order was also relaxed by an order dated 10.02.2022. Thereafter, the 2/6
petitioner went to Singapore and now, he is working in Singapore. Due to his absence, the trial Court has issued non-bailable warrant to the petitioner. The petitioner claims that non-bailable warrant has been issued without issuing any summons to the petitioner. Therefore, he prays for interference.
4.Admittedly, the petitioner is in abroad, after relaxing the condition. However, the petitioner has not taken any steps to follow up the case. Now, the respondent Police claims that the trial has almost completed and the Investigating Officer has been examined. For questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C., and for the appearance of the petitioner only, the trial is pending, for a long time. It appears that after issuance of non-bailable warrant, the petitioner has also been declared as proclaimed offender and only thereafter, lookout circular has been issued.
3/6
5.Considering the rival submission, this Court is not inclined to recall the lookout circular issued as against the petitioner and it is open to the petitioner to return to India. In the event, if the petitioner arrested, he shall be produced before the concerned trial Court, immediately. The petitioner shall file an application for bail, raise all his grounds before the concerned Judicial Magistrate, satisfy the Magistrate that he will be available for the trial. In the event, if the trial Court is satisfied with the grounds raised by the petitioner, then, the trial Court shall take a call as to whether bail can be granted to the petitioner or not, within a period of one week from the date of filing of his bail application.
6.Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
11.08.2025 gns 4/6
To 1.The Special Court for POCSO Act Cases, Thanjavur.
2.The Superintendent of Police, District Police Office, Thanjavur District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Vattathikottai Police Station, Thanjavur District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
gns 11.08.2025 6/6