1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:14.12.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P.(MD).No.16239 of 2011 and M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2011 1.M.Ramesh 2.S.Ramesh 3.M.Suresh :Petitioners -Vs- The State rep. By The Inspector of Police, Pasuvanthanai Polcie Station, Thoothukudi District. (Crime No.86 of 2009) :Respondent PRAYER:Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records and set aside the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kovilpatti dated 30.11.2011 in Cr.M.P.No.10789 of 2011 in P.R.C.No.34 of 2010 in crime No.86 of 2009, with regard to imposing of the condition and thereby directing the petitioner to sign before the respondent police daily at 10.00 A.M. and 5.00 P.M. For Petitioners: Mr.P.Pethu Rajesh For Respondents: Mr.P.Kannithevan,Government Advocate (Crl. Side) ORDER This petition has been filed to call for the records and set aside the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kovilpatti dated 30.11.2011 in Cr.M.P.No.10789 of 2011 in P.R.C.No.34 of 2010 in crime No.86 of 2009, with regard to imposing of the condition and thereby directing the petitioner to sign before the respondent police daily at 10.00 A.M. and 5.00 P.M. 2.Heard Mr.P.Pethu Rajesh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.P.Kannithevan, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing on behalf of the respondent. 3.According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the petitioners were implicated in the case under Sections 302 read with 392 I.P.C. and they were regularly attending the Court and on one occasion only, they could not appear before the Court and even a before a petition filed under Section 317 Cr.P.C., the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kovilpatti issued non bailable warrant against the petitioners. A petition was filed to cancel NBW and the same was ordered with onerous conditions. He would further submit that the petitioners are ready to appear before the said Court for all hearings without fail in the event of cancellation of the condition imposed by the said Court, for cancelling the non bailable warrant. 4.The learned Government Advocate (criminal side) would submit in his argument that no doubt, the petitioners have been granted an order of cancellation of non bailable warrant passed against him with a condition to appear before the respondent police in the morning at 10.00 A.M. and in the evening at 5.00 P.M., but, on no occasion, the petitioners appeared before the respondent police and therefore, they have no right to seek for cancellation of the said conditions imposed on them. He would also submit that if for any reasons, this Court is inclined to set aside the conditions imposed against the petitioners, suitable directions may be issued against the petitioners to co-operate with the court to conduct the said case in an expeditious manner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 5.Considering the submissions made by both parties, this Court could see that the petitioners were ranked as accused in P.R.C.No.34 of 2010, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Kovilpatti and they absented themselves on 15.11.2011, due to their bad health and therefore, non bailable warrant was issued by the said Court. The petitioners have applied for cancellation of non bailable warrant by surrendering themselves before the said Court and the said Court had passed an order, cancelling the non bailable warrant with the condition against the petitioners to appear and sign before the respondent police station daily at 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. without fail. The said conditions imposed by the said Court is questioned now. There is no dispute that the petitioners had appeared before the said Court for all hearings except the hearing date on 15.11.2011. The case is now taken on file and the committal proceedings are processing. In the said circumstances, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners had also undertaken that they would appear before the committal Court on all hearings and to co-operate with the Committal Court for an expeditious committal and they would also co-operate with the Sessions Court for an expeditious disposal of the case. Since the petitioners are willing to co-operate for the disposal of the case at an earlier point of time, this Court is inclined to set aside and modified the condition imposed against them as per the order dated 30.11.2011, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kovilpatti. 6.Accordingly, this criminal original petition is ordered and the order dated 30.11.2011 made in Cr.M.P.No.10789 of 2011 in P.R.C.No.34 of 2010 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kovilpatti is set aside However, the petitioners are directed to appear before the Committal Court for all hearing dates without fail and to co-operate with the Court to have an expeditious committal and they are also directed to appear before the Sessions Court on all hearing dates to have an expeditious disposal of the said case. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. Sd/- Deputy Registrar (Accounts) / TRUE COPY / Assistant Registrar To: 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kovilpatti. 2.-Do- Thro' The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tuticorin. 3.The Inspector of Police, Pasuvanthanai Polcie Station, Thoothukudi District. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Madurai. Arul RP/04.01.2012/2p/5c. Crl.O.P.(MD).No.16239 of 2011 14.12.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/