Sathish Narayanan v. THE STATE REP.BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
CRL OP/5614/2025 · 2025-02-28
Sunder Mohan
Transfer Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 29705 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 29705 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Crl.O.P.No.5614 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 28.02.2025 CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Crl.O.P.No.5614 of 2025 Sathish Narayanan ...Petitioner/Accused Vs. The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Pallikkaranai Police Station, Chengalpattu District. (Cr No.519 of 2017)
... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in the above SC. No.38 of 2018 on the file of the Additional District Court, Chengalpattu District. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Magesh For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam
Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.5614 of 2025 O R D E R The petitioner/accused, who apprehends arrest pursuant to an Non Bailable Warrant issued by the learned Additional District Judge, Chengalpattu in S.C. No.38 of 2018, on 09.03.2018, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was initially granted bail and thereafter he was regularly appearing before the Court. However, on 09.03.2018, due to his illness, he was unable to appear before the Court and that Non-Bailable Warrant came to be issued. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to co-operate for the speedy disposal of the case and he is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.
3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), however, would submit that the petitioner was aware of the proceedings and he had appeared before the learned Additional District Judge on summons and thereafter failed to appear.
4. Heard both sides. 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.5614 of 2025
5. Considering the rival submissions, this Court is of the view that the anticipatory bail cannot be granted. However, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the Additional District Judge, Chengalpattu for recall of warrant, which may be considered on the same day on merits and in accordance with the law.
6. With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. 28.02.2025 rkp To 1.The Inspector of Police, Pallikkaranai Police Station, Chengalpattu District. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 3.The Additional District Judge, Chengalpattu. 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.5614 of 2025 SUNDER MOHAN., J. rkp Crl.O.P.No.5614 of 2025 28.02.2025 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis