This order declares an anticipatory bail petition infructuous as the petitioner had already been arrested, closing the matter without substantive adjudication.
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.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Friday, the Sixth day of April Two Thousand Eighteen
PRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.R.SWAMINATHAN
CRL OP(MD) No.4349 of 2018
SATHIYASEELAN (WRONGLY MENTIONED IN THE FIR AS SATHYA)
... PETITIONER / ACCUSED No.6
Vs
THE STATE REPRESENTED BY
THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SINDUPATTY POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT (CR.NO.16/2018) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT
For Petitioner : Mr.S.MAHENDRAPATHY Advocate
For Respondent : Mr.A.P.G.OHM CHAIRMA PRABHU
Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)
PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-
The learned Government Advocate appearing for the state submits that the petitioner has already been arrested.
Therefore, nothing survives for adjudication. This Criminal Original Petition is closed as infructuous, accordingly.
sd/-
06/04/2018
/ TRUE COPY /
Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
2
TO
1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SINDUPATTY POLICE STATION,
myr JAM/11/04/2018/ PN-KAK / RNB / 2p-3c
ORDER
IN
CRL OP(MD) No.4349 of 2018
Date :06/04/2018
SATHIYASEELAN
THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SINDUPATTY POLICE STATION
G.R. SWAMINATHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
