1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.02.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1472 of 2011 G.Praveen Kumar ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai. 2. The Inspector of Police, Karuppayoorani Police Station, Karuppayoorani, Madurai District. 3. M/s. La Wins Marble and Granite Private Limited, Represented by its Managing Director/ Authorized Signatory, Mr.Sayed Nasir Hussain 4. Mr.Sayed Nasir Hussain, Managing Director/Authorized Sigantory of M/s. La Wins Marble and Granite Private Limited. ... Respondents PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 herein to execute the warrant of arrest issued against the fourth respondent/second accused in S.T.C.No.329 of 2009 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai within a stipulated time as that may be fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : M/s. A.Saravanan For R1 and R2 : Mrs.S.Devasena Govt. Advocate (Crl.side) O R D E R This petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 and 2 herein to execute the warrant of arrest issued against the fourth respondent/A2 in S.T.C.No.329 of 2009 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai within a stipulated time. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the State. 3. According to the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, a bailable warrant has been issued by the learned Judicial https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 Magistrate No.II, Madurai in S.T.C.No.329 of 2009, on 16.07.2009 and the said warrant is yet to be executed, even after the representation made by the petitioner to the second respondent. Therefore, he would submit that because of the said non-execution of bailable warrant, the entire proceedings are pending and therefore, suitable direction may be issued against the fourth respondent to execute the bailable warrant. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) would submit in her argument that if the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai would have been communicated immediately, it would have been executed. However, the second respondent police is ready to execute the warrant, provided the copy of the warrant is produced by the petitioner before the second respondent to help the second respondent police to identify the fourth respondent. Considering the submission, the petitioner is directed to present a copy of the bailable warrant issued to the second respondent police by the Court on 16.07.2009, signed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai despatched in D.No.1190 and to co-operate with the second respondent police to identify the said fourth respondent and the second respondent police is directed to execute the bailable warrant within a period of 15 days and to report the matter to the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai in accordance with law. With the aforesaid direction, this petition is ordered. akv Sd/- Deputy Registrar[LA] /True copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai. 2. The Inspector of Police, Karuppayoorani Police Station, Karuppayoorani, Madurai District. 3. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai. 4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. +1 cc to Mr.A.Saravanan, Advocate SR.No.4678. Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1472 of 2011 Dated:07.02.2011 2P/6C RPB 09.02.2011[I.T.] https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/