The Court dismissed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C., noting the petitioner was absconding and custodial interrogation was required for the CBI investigation.
Application for anticipatory bail dismissed; petitioner directed to surrender before the Court below for regular bail consideration.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Wednesday, the Twelfth day of April Two Thousand Seventeen
PRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr Justice S. VAIDYANATHAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.535 of 2017
A.SRIRAM, [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]
Vs
THE STATE REP. BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, ANTI-CORRUPTION BRANCH, 3RD FLOOR, SASTRI BHAVAN, CHENNAI-6. CR.NO.RC 55 OF 2015
For Petitioner : M/S.K.V.KALIYUGAPERUMAL Advocate
For Respondent : MR.K.SRINIVASAN SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR CBI
CASES
PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-
This Court already dismissed the earlier anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner on 29.06.2016 in Crl.O.P.No.9774 of 2016. The petitioner, who is an employee of the Indian Overseas Bank, is under suspension and his whereabouts are not known and he is not traceable by the respondent. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Calendar Case has been registered in C.C.No.1 of 2017 and the petitioner has received the summons from the Court below to appear before the Court on 03.04.2017, on which date, he has not appeared before the Court below, as the matter is being listed before this Court. Since serious allegations are made against the petitioner and merely because the C.C. is registered against him, it does not mean that the relief sought for by the petitioner has to be granted. As the respondent submitted that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required and that there would be further investigation on the issue in question, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this petition
is dismissed. It is open for the petitioner to surrender before the Court below and make necessary application, in which event, the Court below shall consider the same on merits and in accordance with law.
-sd/-
12/04/2017
This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned
TRUE COPY
Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO
1 THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, ANTI-CORRUPTION BRANCH, 3RD FLOOR, SASTRI BHAVAN, CHENNAI-6.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
CC to M/S.K.V.KALIYUGAPERUMAL Advocate on payment of necessary charges
CRL OP.535/2017 Date :12/04/2017 RD 18/04/2017
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. given prior dismissal and pending criminal trial.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
A. SRIRAM
THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
S. VAIDYANATHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
