Dismissed

S.Dhanabal v. S.Thangavel

Madras HC27 Jun 2022CRL MP/8022/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a petition seeking exemption from surrender for a convicted person. The Court held, relying on Supreme Court precedents, that routine exemptions are impermissible to prevent convicts from becoming untraceable, noting the application lacked special reasons.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was granted one last opportunity to surrender on or before 08.07.2022 before the exemption petition was dismissed.

S.Dhanabal Vs S.Thangavel — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Monday, the Twenty Seventh day of June Two Thousand Twenty Two

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice D. BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶6

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.8022 of 2022

¶7

¶8

Crl.R.C.No.783 of 2022

¶9

S.DHANABAL [ PETITIONER ]

¶10

¶11

S.THANGAVELU [ RESPONDENT ]

¶12

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to exempt the petitioner from surrendering in C.A.No. 11 of 2018 on the file of the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, dated 18.09.2019 confirming the Judgement passed in C.C.No. 7 of 2014 by the Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court No. 1 at Magisterial Level, Coimbatore dated 27.11.2017 pending disposal of the above Crl.R.C.No.783 of 2022.

¶13

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S. B.KUMARASAMY, Advocate for the petitioner the court made the following order:-

¶14

This petition is filed to exempt the petitioner from surrender on the Judgment and sentence imposed by the Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court No.I at Magisterial Level, Coimbatore, dated 27.11.2017, in C.C.No.7 of 2014 and confirmed by the IV-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, dated 18.09.2019, in C.A.No.11 of 2018, pending disposal of the present Criminal Revision Case.

¶15

2.I have perused the petition filed for exemption and I am not satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the application.

¶16

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

¶17

3.The Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Surya Baksh Singh Vs. State of U.P.1, has held in paragraph No.25, which reads as follows:-

¶18

“The routine is to file an appeal, apply and get enlarged on bail or get exempted from surrender, and thereafter wilfully to become untraceable or unresponsive. It is the bounden duty cast upon the Judge not merely to ensure that an innocent person is not punished but equally not to become a mute spectator to the spectacle of the convict circumventing his conviction.”

¶19

Similarly, in the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in Vivek Rai v. High Court of Jharkhand2, in paragraph No.3, has held as hereunder:-

¶20

“We do not find any merit in the challenge to the validity of the Rule. It is well-known practice that generally a revision against conviction and sentence is filed after an appeal is dismissed and the convicted person is taken into custody in the Court itself. The object of the Rule is to ensure that a person who has been convicted by two courts obeys the law and does not abscond. The provision cannot thus be held to be arbitrary in any manner. The provision is to regulate the procedure of the Court and does not, in any manner, conflict with the substantive provisions of CrPC relied upon by the petitioners.”

¶21

Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that in a routine manner, exemption from surrender cannot be granted.

¶22

4.In this case, there is no special and acceptable reasons assigned in the application for grant for exemption from surrender. Therefore, the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition for exemption shall stand dismissed. However, one more opportunity is granted to the petitioner to surrender before 08.07.2022.

¶23

-sd/-

¶24

27/06/2022

¶25

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

¶26

TRUE COPY

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

¶30

1 THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

¶31

2 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, FAST TRACK COURT NO.1 AT MAGISTERIAL LEVEL, COIMBATORE.

¶32

3 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COIMBATORE. [FOR INFORMATION]

¶33

C.C. to M/S. B.KUMARASAMY Advocate on payment of necessary charges

¶34

Order

¶35

¶36

CRL MP.8022/2022 in Crl.R.C.No.783 of 2022

¶37

Date :27/06/2022

¶38

From 7.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the BAIL/Anti.BAIL Orders in this format

¶39

RW-30/06/2022

¶40

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

S.Dhanabal v. S.Thangavel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Dhanabal v. S.Thangavel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs M.Palanisamy

Reliance Gen.Ins.Co.Ltd., Vs M.Sureshkumar

Gandhi Bai Vs The Director of School Education

S.Rameshkumar Vs State Represented by

A.Dayalan Vs Selva

Sujaaram Vs Rajkumar