Dismissed

Ramasamy v. Imam Oli

Madras HC23 Apr 2018CRL OP(MD)/2706/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed a Criminal Original Petition seeking cancellation of bail granted in a case under the SC/ST Act. The Court held that the remedy lies in an appeal under Section 14A of the Act, not Section 482 Cr.P.C., rendering the petition non-maintainable.

What did the court decide?

The petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for cancellation of bail was dismissed as not maintainable.

Ramasamy Vs Imam Oli — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 23.04.2018

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2706 of 2018

¶7

Ramasamy ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.Imam Oli 2.Basheer Mohammed 3.S.Mohammed Yusuf 4.Galeef Rahuman 5.The Inspector of Police Ganesh Nagar Police Station Pudukottai ... Respondents

¶10

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 439(2) r/w 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to cancel the bail order in Crl.M.P.No.425 of 2018 dated 12.02.2018 passed by the Principal District Court, Pudukottai and set aside the same with costs.

¶11

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Venkatesan For R-5 : Mr.A.Robinson Government Advocate (Criminal side) For R1 & R3 : Mr.v.Singan For R2 & R4 : Mr.J.Anand Kumar

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This application is filed for cancellation of bail granted in favour of the accused in Crime No.13 of 2018 on the file of the Ganesh Nagar Police Station.

¶14

2.The accused, namely, Imam Oli and others have been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 120(b), https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 465, 471 and 447 I.P.C r/w Section 3(1) of SC/ST (POA) Amended Act, 2015.

¶15

¶16

This Court by an order dated 01.02.2018 directed the accused to surrender before the trial Court and on such surrender, the learned Principal Sessions Judge Cum Special PCR Court, Pudukkottai was directed to consider their bail petition on merits and in accordance with law, after issuing notice to the defacto complainant under Section 15 A of the SC/ST Act.

¶17

4.It is now submitted that even before receiving the said notice by the defacto complainant under Section 15(A), bail was granted in favour of the accused. Therefore, the defacto complainant has moved this Court for cancellation of the bail given in their favour.

¶18

5.If the defacto complainant is aggrieved by granting of bail in the case arising under the Provisions of SC & ST Act 1989, only appeal under Section 14 (A) of the Act would lie. Therefore, the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed as notmaintainable.

¶19

Sd/Assistant Registrar(AD-II)

¶20

/True copy/

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

msa

¶23

¶24

1.The Principal District Judge, Pudukottai.

¶25

The Inspector of Police Ganesh Nagar Police Station Pudukottai

¶26

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶27

+1 cc to MR.R.VENKATESAN, Advocate SR.No.63441

¶28

Crl.O.P(MD)No.2706 of 2018 23.04.2018

¶29

SMA/CM/SAR-2/17.05.2018:2P/5C

¶30

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Ramasamy v. Imam Oli

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramasamy v. Imam Oli

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.S.Rajasekaran Vs R.Ramakrishnan

1. Usman Ali @ Ibrahim Vs State, Inspector of Police

M/S.Golecha Global Vs ARUNSHAH,4/6,MAMTHA Complex

Pothiraj, Vs the Inspector of Police

D. Devadasan Vs the Inspector of Police

Mohamed Feroza, Vs the Inspector of Police