Dismissed

Govindhasamy v. State Rep.by

Madras HC16 Oct 2023CRL OP/23746/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras dismissed a Criminal Original Petition seeking a direction to hear a bail application filed by petitioners who had surrendered in an SC/ST Act case. The court held that the petition could not be entertained because Section 15(A) mandates prior notice to the defacto complainant, and allowing the immediate application would defeat this statutory requirement.

What the court decided

AI extract

Govindhasamy Vs State Rep.by — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P..No.23746 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 16.10.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.23746 of 2023

¶7

1.Govindhasamy 2. Anandhi ... Petitioners

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1. State Represented by The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Maduranthagam Sub Division, Chengalapattu District.

¶10

2. The Inspector of Police, Anaicut Police Station, Chengalpattu District. (Crime No.343 of 2023) ... Respondents

¶11

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, pleased to direct the learned Principal District Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu to consider the bail petition preferred by the petitioners upon their surrender in Crime No.343 of 2023 on the file of the 1 st respondent police on the same day.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Baskar

¶13

For Respondents : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

1/4

¶16

Crl.O.P..No.23746 of 2023

¶17

Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This Criminal Original Petition is filed seeking a direction to consider the bail petition preferred by the petitioners upon their surrender in Crime No.343 of 2023 for the offence under SC/ST Act.

¶20

2. Petition to consider the surrender petition on the same day cannot

¶21

be entertained, in view of Section 15(A) of SC/ST Act, which mandates notice to the defacto complainant before considering the bail petition. In such circumstances, the prayer sought in this petition if allowed will defeat the mandatory provision.

¶22

3. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

¶23

16.10.2023

¶24

Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No Sma

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

2/4

¶27

Crl.O.P..No.23746 of 2023

¶28

¶29

1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Maduranthagam Sub Division, Chengalapattu District.

¶30

2. The Inspector of Police, Anaicut Police Station, Chengalpattu District.

¶31

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶32

3/4

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

Crl.O.P..No.23746 of 2023

¶35

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.

¶36

Sma

¶37

Crl.O.P.No.23746 of 2023

¶38

16.10.2023

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

4/4

Govindhasamy v. State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Govindhasamy v. State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raja Vs the Inspector of Police

Sathish Kumar Vs State Rep by

B. Dorai Raj Vs the Superintendent of Police

Rajesh Vs the State Rep.by

S.K.Balasundaram Vs the Inspector of Police

R.Elango Vs P.Prakashkumar