Jeyabalan v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 13.08.2025 CORAM :

THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI Crl.OP(MD)No.13507 of 2025 Jeyabalan ... Petitioner versus

1. State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Palani Town Police Station, Dindigul District.

2. Dinesh

...Respondents

Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 447 of BNSS, to withdraw S.C.No.129 of 2025 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court (Fast Track), Dindigul and transfer the same to the Principal and Sessions Court, Madurai.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ayyanar Prem Kumar For R1 : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The petitioner is the sole accused in S.C.No.129 of 2025 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court (Fast Track), Dindigul. He is facing charges for the offences under Sections 294(b), 307, 302 and 506(2) 1/4

IPC. The petitioner has filed this petition that he is facing life threat and if the trial is continued in Dindigul, his life will be in danger. Therefore, he has filed this petition seeking transfer the case in S.C.No.129 of 2025 from the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court (Fast Track), Dindigul, to the file of the Principal and Sessions Court, Madurai.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is facing life threat from the defacto complainant and others. Therefore, he seeks to transfer the case in S.C.No.129 of 2025 from the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court (Fast Track), Dindigul, to the Principal and Sessions Court, Madurai.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, who takes notice for the first respondent, submits that the defacto complainant is the brother-in-law of the petitioner. The petitioner has murdered his own mother-in-law and also severed the hand of the defacto complainant. On their verification, they found that there is no life threat to the petitioner. He further submits that there are 38 witnesses in the final report and transferring this case from the file of the Dindigul to the learned Principal and Sessions Court, Madurai, would be inconvenience for the witnesses in the trial. He further submits 2/4

that apart from this case, yet another case is also registered as against the petitioner.

4. This Court considered the rival submissions made.

5. The convenience of the witnesses has to be taken into consideration during the trial. In the event, if the petitioner is facing any life threat, he shall make arrangements on his own to protect his life. The respondent Police shall ascertain as to whether the petitioner is facing any life threat and if so, inform the defacto complainant about the consequences.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is closed. 13.08.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes ogy To

1. The Inspector of Police, Palani Town Police Station, Dindigul District.

3/4

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

ogy

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

Crl.OP(MD)No.13507 of 2025 13.08.2025 4/4