CRL OP No. 19799 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 22-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP No. 19799 of 2026 and Crl.MP.No.13117 of 2026 A.Sezhian S/o. Arumugam, No.15, Bharathi Nagar, Thiru Nagar Extension, Vizhupuram-605 602. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. by, The Inspector of Police Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Chennai City II Detachment, (V and AC Cr.No.10/AC/2014/CC II) ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to set aside the Docket order dt.16.06.2026 made in Crl.MP.No.1994 of 2026 in Spl.CC.No.14 of 2026 pending on the file of the Learned Principal District Court,Chengalpet and pass such other order or orders as it may deem fit and necessary and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Deivanandam For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar, Counsel for Government of Tamilnadu (Crl.Side) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 19799 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 5 ORDER This Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 7, 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, challenging the impugned order in Crl.Mp.No.1994 of 2026 dated 16.06.2026 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Chengalpet, in and by which the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 233(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 / Section 256(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, was rejected. The petitioner is an accused in Spl.C.C.No.14 of 2026 on the file of the Principal District Court, Chengalpattu. 2. When the trial was pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate in Spl.C.C.No.11 of 2025, the evidence on the defence side was closed. Thereafter, the case was transferred to the Principal District Court, Chengalpattu, and renumbered as Spl.C.C.No.14 of 2026. 3. After the transfer, notice was served on the petitioner in the month of January 2026. After a lapse of about six months, the petitioner filed a petition seeking to reopen the defence side evidence to examine another person as D.W.3. Initially, permission was granted to the petitioner to take out summons to secure the presence of one Samson Sugirtharaj. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 19799 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 5 4. Though summons was taken, it could not be served on the said witness as he was not available. Thereafter, when the matter was posted for arguments, the petitioner once again filed an application on 16.06.2026 seeking to examine the said Samson Sughirdharaj as D.W.3. 5. A perusal of the records reveals that the case had already been posted for arguments. The conduct of the petitioner clearly indicates that the application was filed only to protract the proceedings. Therefore, the trial Court has rightly dismissed the petition. This Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order warranting interference. 6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 22-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No Vv https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 19799 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 5 To 1. The Inspector of Police Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Chennai City II Detachment 2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 19799 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 5 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J. VV CRL OP No. 19799 of 2026 22-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis