High Court · 2025

CRL OP(MD). No.1397 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 29.01.2025PRESENTThe Hon`ble Mr.Justice N.ANAND VENKATESHCRL OP(MD). No.1397 of 2025Mithun @ Mithun Manickam,S/o.Jeyaraman... Petitioner/Accused No.1 VsThe State of Tamil Nadurepresented by the Inspector of Police,Manamadurai Police Station,Sivagangai District.(Crime No.10 of 2021)... Respondent / Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.J.Vijayaraja, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.S.Ravi, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS,2023.PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.10 of 2021 on the file of the respondent Police.1/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1397 of 2025ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused No.1, who was arrested and remanded to judicialcustody on 05.01.2024 for the alleged offences under Sections 341, 307, 302, 147, 148,120(b), 324, 326, 149, 114 of IPC, in Crime No.10 of 2021, on the file of the respondentpolice, seeks bail.2. The petitioner has been arrayed as an accused in Crime No.10 of 2021. Hewas initially arrested and remanded to judicial custody. Subsequently, he filed a bailapplication and the petitioner was granted bail. There are some previous casesagainst the petitioner and in one of those cases, he was arrested and he was in judicialcustody. The petitioner was produced before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court,Manamadurai on execution of PT warrant and the concerned Court based on the factthat the petitioner did not appear before the Court during the hearing, proceeded toremand the petitioner to judicial custody and the proceedings dated 19.08.2024 is tothe effect that a NBW was issued against the petitioner and there was no satisfactoryexplanation for the non-presence and therefore, the concerned Court cancelled theearlier bail granted and remanded the petitioner to judicial custody in exercising thepower and jurisdiction under Section 309 of CrPC.2/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1397 of 20253. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that insofar as the petitioneris concerned, the matter was pending in P.R.C. No.41 of 2022 at the stage of service ofsummon. To substantiate the same, the petitioner drew the attention of this Court tothe proceedings dated 08.09.2023 wherein it has been mentioned that fresh summonsis pending as against the petitioner. The learned counsel submitted that all of asudden, the learned Magistrate assumed that a NBW is pending against the petitionerand thereafter, proceeded to cancel the bail granted in favour of the petitioner andremanded the petitioner to judicial custody after he was produced before the Courton execution of the NBW. The learned counsel submitted that such a course of actionadopted by the learned Judicial Magistrate is illegal and to substantiate the same, thelearned counsel relied upon the judgment of this Court in Palanivel -vs- State,represented by Inspector of Police, Veeranam Police Station, Salem District (CrimeNo.538 of 2023) reported in (2019) 3 MLJ (Crl) 351. The learned counsel also reliedupon the subsequent orders passed by this Court by relying upon this order in someof the bail applications.4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that thepetitioner is a history sheeter and that he has 6 previous cases against him and all3/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1397 of 2025those cases are pending trial. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submittedthat the NBW was issued against the petitioner on 05.01.2024 and it was able to beexecuted only on 19.08.2024. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor furthersubmitted that due to the attitude of the accused persons, even though the case hasnow been committed to the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Court,Sivagangai which is pending in S.C.No.209 of 2024, the Court is not able to framecharges. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that in a case where thepetitioner is enlarged on bail and subsequently the petitioner fails to appear beforethe Court, the Magistrate Court can always cancel the bond and remand thepetitioner to prison by executing the NBW, in exercising its power and jurisdictionunder Section 309 of CrPC. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor furthersubmitted that the PT warrant that was issued against the petitioner was alsoconverted into a regular warrant and the petitioner was also questioned by thelearned Magistrate. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submitted thatthe case is now posted for framing of charges on 12.02.2025. Accordingly, the learnedAdditional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.5. This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side andperused the materials available on record.4/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1397 of 20256. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the petitioner was initiallygranted bail in this case. Subsequently, the petitioner was arrested in some other caseand he was in judicial custody. The Court proceedings of the learned JudicialMagistrate, Manamadurai were placed before this Court. On going through the same,it is seen that right from 25.04.2022 till 08.09.2023, it has been mentioned that freshsummons is pending for A1 apart from some other accused persons. It is alsomentioned that NBW is pending as against some of the other accused persons. All ofa sudden, in the proceedings dated 05.01.2024, the learned Magistrate has mentionedas if NBW is pending as against A1 apart from A6 and A7. It is not known as to whenthe NBW was issued against the petitioner (A1) and probably due to over sight, thepetitioner was also included in the list of accused persons against whom the NBWwas issued. Thereafter, the petitioner was produced before the learned JudicialMagistrate on execution of PT warrant and it was converted into a regular warrantand he was questioned and the Court not being satisfied with the answer given bythe petitioner for his non appearance, forfeited the bond that was executed by thepetitioner while he was granted bail earlier and the petitioner was remanded tojudicial custody in exercise of power under Section 309 of CrPC.5/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1397 of 20257. The procedure that was adopted by the learned Judicial Magistrate,Manamadurai is illegal. Insofar as the petitioner (A1) is concerned, there is absolutelyno indication as to when NBW was issued against the petitioner. This is in view ofthe fact that the petitioner was in judicial custody in some other case and till05.01.2024, the case was only at the stage of issuance of fresh summons to thepetitioner (A1). Therefore, the learned Judicial Magistrate assuming that a NBW ispending against the petitioner, is the first mistake that was committed by the learnedMagistrate. In view of this mistake committed by the learned Magistrate,subsequently the bail granted in favour of the petitioner was cancelled after thepetitioner was produced before the Court by virtue of PT warrant. Even there theprocedure that was adopted by the learned Magistrate is illegal in view of thejudgment of this Court in Palanivel -vs- State, represented by Inspector of Police,Veeranam Police Station, Salem District (Crime No.538 of 2023) reported in (2019) 3MLJ (Crl) 351. Hence, remanding the petitioner to judicial custody throughproceedings dated 19.08.2024 is illegal and unsustainable. Hence, this Court has tonecessarily enlarge the petitioner on bail.8. In the light of the above discussion, this Court is inclined to grant bail to thepetitioner subject to the following conditions:6/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1397 of 20259. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing abond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties, each fora like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Principal District and Sessions Court,Sivagangai, and on further conditions that:-[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in thesurety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank passBook to ensure their identity. [b] the petitioner shall report before the learned Principal District andSessions Court, Sivagangai daily at 10.30 a.m. apart from the hearing dates untilfurther orders, except on those dates where the petitioner has to appear before Courtin the other cases which are pending against him. [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either duringinvestigation or trial. [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.7/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1397 of 2025 [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/TrialCourt is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance withlaw as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by thelearned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Courtin P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered underSection 269 of BNS, 2023. sd/- 29/01/2025 / TRUE COPY / 29/01/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. PALTO1 THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT ANDSESSIONS JUDGE, SIVAGANGAI.2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,MANAMADURAI POLICE STATION,SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT.8/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1397 of 20253 THE SUPERINTENDENTCENTRAL PRISON, MADURAI.4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. COPY TO:THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,MANAMADURAI.+1 CC to M/s.J.VIJAYARAJA, Advocate ( SR-1038[I] dated 29/01/2025 ) ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.1397 of 2025 Date :29/01/2025 SS/SAR- /29/01/2025/ 9P/7CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 9/9