1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Twenty Third day of September Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.12674 of 2011 BABU ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLCIE SHANARPATTI POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT. CRIME NO. 133/1999 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. R.MAHESWARAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.RAMAR, Addl.Public Prosecutor ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 2.11.2010 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 392 and 397 of IPC in S.C.No.143 of 2011 on the file of the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Dindigul and hence, seeks bail. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since he was jumped out of bail, he was arrested on 2.11.2010 and he was remanded to judicial custody and he is in judicial custody for more than 280 days and even though he filed an application before the Sessions Judge, that was dismissed and hence, he come forward with this application and he prays for enlargement on bail. 3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor(Crl.Side) would submit that the petitioner was jumped out of bail and he was absconded for seven years and then only, the case has been splitted and the case has been pending and because of his non appearance, Non Bailable Warrant has been issued and he was arrested and hence, he prays for dismissal of this application. 4. Considering the rival submissions made by both sides, it could be seen that the alleged occurrence has been taken place in the year 1999 and the case is registered in Crime No.133 of 1999 and after investigation, charge sheet has been filed which was taken on file https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 S.C.No.143 of 2011 and for his non appearance, Non Bailable Warrant has been issued which was pending for the nearly seven years and he was arrested on 2.11.2010 after the case has been split up and he is in judicial custody for more than 280 days, Considering the fact that the case is of the year 1999, instead of granting bail to the petitioner, I direct the learned Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Dindigul to expedite the trial and dispose the case within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The prosecution is directed to co-operate with the court to produce witness as time fixed by the learned Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Dindigul. 5. With the above observation, this application is disposed off. sd/- 23/09/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1 THE ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE, DINDIGUL. 2 THE SUPERINTENDENT,CENTRAL PRISON,MADURAI. 3 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SHANARPATTI POLICE STATION,DINDIGUL DISTRICT. 4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12674 of 2011 Date :23/09/2011 PA/28.09.2011/2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/