Allowed

V.Pattabiraman v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC3 Mar 2021CRL MP/2491/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted a petition seeking to condone the petitioner's absence for November 2020 from appearing before the trial court due to lockdown and travel restrictions, allowing him to resume compliance from May 2021.

What did the court decide?

The absence of the petitioner during November 2020 is condoned and he is permitted to continue complying with the order to appear before the XI Additional Judge, Chennai, once in three months commenci

V.Pattabiraman Vs the Inspector of Police — Arbitration | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Wednesday, the Third day of March Two Thousand Twenty One

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶6

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.2491 of 2021

¶7

IN CRL A.579/2010

¶8

V.PATTABIRAMAN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]
Vs

¶9

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE [ RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT ] CBI/B.S. AND F.C., CHENNAI.

¶10

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein the High Court will be pleased to condone the absence of the petitioner on 2nd November 2020 in reporting before the learned XI Additional Judge for CBI, Chennai in Crl.MP.No.2 of 2011 in Crl.A.No.579/2010 in order dated 19.12.2011 and consequently permit the petitioner to report before the learned XI Additional Judge for CBI, Chennai

¶11

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.K.RAJASEKARAN, Advocate for the petitioner and of MR.K.SRINIVASAN SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR CBI CASES on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:-

¶12

The Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed, seeking to condone the absence of the petitioner in complying with the condition imposed by this Court in M.P.No.2 of 2011 dated 19.12.2011 in Crl.A.No.579 of 2010, directing the petitioner to appear before the XI Additional Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai, once in three months on the first working day at 10.30 a.m. till the disposal of the appeal.

¶13

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

¶14

The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that this Court had granted suspension of sentence vide Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2010 by order dated 19.10.2010 directing the petitioner to appear before the trial Court on the second working day of every month. Later, this Court had modified the condition by order dated 19.12.2011 vide Crl.M.P.No.2 of 2011 directing the petitioner to appear before the trial Judge once in three months i.e. on the first working day of that month at 10.30 a.m. till the disposal of the appeal. He would submit that the petitioner is aged 72 years and residing at Bangalore. However, he was all along regularly complying with the conditions. Thereafter, during National vide lock down, the petitioner could not appear before the trial Judge during 2^nd April 2020 and thereafter, due to travelling restrictions, the petitioner was unable to appear before the trial Court during November 2020 and thereby, the present petition has been filed seeking to condone the absence of the petitioner during November 2020 and the petitioner may be permitted to continue complying with the condition.

¶15

The learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI cases would submit that the petitioner was earlier regularly appearing before the Court. However, he did not appear before the Court during November 2020.

¶16

Taking into consideration of the above facts and submissions, this Court is satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of this petition. The absence of the petitioner during the Month of November 2020 is condoned and the petitioner is permitted to continue complying with the condition as directed by this Court in Crl.M.P.No.2 of 2011 dated 19.12.2011 in Crl.A.No.579 of 2010, starting from the first working day of May 2021.

¶17

Accordingly, this petition is ordered.

¶18

-sd/-

¶19

03/03/2021

¶20

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned

¶21

TRUE COPY

¶22

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

¶23

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

¶24

¶25

1 THE XI ADDITIONAL SPECIAL JUDGE FOR C.B.I. CASES,
CHENNAI.
2 THE SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR CBI CASES,
HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
CBI/B.S. AND F.C., CHENNAI.
+2C.C. to M/S.K.RAJASEKARAN Advocate on payment of necessary
charges SR NO.2752
Order
in
CRL MP.2491/2021
in
CRL A.579/2010
Date :03/03/2021
From 7.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified
copies of the BAIL/Anti.BAIL Orders in this format
MK:05/03/2021

¶26

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

V.Pattabiraman v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Pattabiraman v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Javeed Ahamed Vs State Rep.by

Mala @ Manimala Vs State Rep by

Prakash Vs State Rep by

Gunaram Phukan @ Sri Gunaram Vs State Rep.by

V.Gurubatham Vs State Rep.by

R.Sivakumar Vs State Rep.by