Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 201018 (MAD)

Purushothaman v. State rep.by, Inspector of Police,

CRL OP/22144/2025 · 2025-10-10

K Rajasekar

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRL OP No. 22144 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 10.10.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL OP No. 22144 of 2025 Purushothaman Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police E-1, Mylapore Police Station, Chennai. Crime No.37 of 2025 Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Original petition has been filed under Section 439(1) (b) Cr.P.C/483 (1) (b) of BNSS Act/528 of BNSS Act, to modify the condition in Para No.5 (b) imposed on the petitioner to the effect that “the petitioner is ready to appear and sign before Hon'ble XVIII M.M. Court at Saidapet daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders” instead of “The petitioner is directed to appear and sign before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m., until further orders” in Crl MP No.3253 of 2025 order passed by the Hon'ble XVIII M.M. Court at Saidapet Court, Chennai dated 26.03.2025 in Crime No.37 of 2025. For Petitioner(s): Mr.C.Srinivasan For Respondent(s): Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.side) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 22144 of 2025 ORDER This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking for modification of the condition imposed by the Court below in Crl.M.P. No.3253 of 2025 dated 26.03.2025, directing the petitioner to sign before the respondent police, daily at 10.00 a.m., until further orders. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while granting bail, the XVIII Judicial Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, imposed a condition on the petitioner, specifically condition 5(b), which says that after release from judicial custody, the petitioner is directed to appear and sign before the respondent police daily at 10.00 A.M., until further orders. He further submits that the petitioner is having threat in appearing before the respondent police and therefore, prays for modification of the said condition. 3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), on instructions, submitted that the petitioner had not complied with the condition imposed by the Court below. 3. The reason stated by the petitioner is not proper and also the petitioner is not complying the conditions imposed by the Court below, therefore, this Court is not inclined to modify the condition in para no.5(b) imposed on the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 22144 of 2025 petitioner in Crl.M.P.No.3253 of 2025 dated 26.03.2025. 4. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. gbi 10.10.2025 1/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 22144 of 2025 To 1.The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police E-1, Mylapore Police Station, Chennai. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 22144 of 2025 K.RAJASEKAR J. gbi CRL OP No. 22144 of 2025 10.10.2025 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis