Allowed¶34

Suresh v. the State of Tamilnadu Rep by, the Deputy Superintendent of Police

Madras HC12 Mar 2025CRL A/217/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Crl.A. No.217 of 2025, decided 12.03.2025; Suresh v. State of Tamil Nadu (Deputy Superintendent of Police, Q Branch, Dharmapuri); bench M.S.Ramesh J. and N.Senthilkumar J. (author); POTA Special Court Poonamallee; Spl.S.C. No.3/2022; Crl.M.P.No.2665 of 2024; bail; Section 317 Cr.P.C.; Section 439 Cr.P.C.; Section 34 POTA; non-bailable warrant; bona fide absence; remand to judicial custody; two sureties; bond Rs.5,000/-; appeal allowed.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; appellant ordered released on bail on furnishing two sureties on execution of a bond of Rs.5,000/-, with a further condition that he appear before the Special Court under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, Poonamallee, Chennai, on all hearing dates. ¶34

Suresh Vs the State of Tamilnadu Rep by, the Deputy… — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶34

Issue for consideration

Whether the order of the Special Court (POTA), Poonamallee, dated 19.12.2024 dismissing the appellant's bail application — after his Section 317 Cr.P.C. application was rejected and he was remanded to judicial custody following issuance of a Non Bailable Warrant for his absence on 13.11.2024 — should be set aside and the appellant enlarged on bail.

¶29

Court's answer

There is substantial force in the contention that although a Non Bailable Warrant was issued on 13.11.2024, the appellant had filed an application under Section 317 Cr.P.C. which the trial Court dismissed.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

The absence of the appellant was bona fide; he subjected himself before the Special Court to demonstrate his bona fides and to show that he would appear before it.

¶33

Key takeaways

The appeal is allowed; the Special Court's order dated 19.12.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.2665 of 2024 in Spl.S.C. No.3/2022 is set aside, and the appellant is to be released on bail on furnishing two sureties with a bond of Rs.5,000/- and on appearing before the Special Court on all hearing dates.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal appeal under Section 34 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 against the Special Court's (POTA, Poonamallee) order dated 19.12.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.2665 of 2024 in Spl.S.C. No.3/2022 refusing bail — appellant, accused No.4 charged under IPC, Arms Act and POTA provisions, arrested 24.11.2002 and admitted to bail by this Court on 22.01.2007 — failed to appear before the Special Court on 13.11.2024, whereupon a Non Bailable Warrant was issued — appellant immediately filed an application under Section 317 Cr.P.C., which the Special Court dismissed, remanding him to judicial custody on 24.11.2024 — his subsequent Section 439 Cr.P.C. bail petition was dismissed on 19.12.2024 — Held, the absence was bona fide, demonstrated by the prompt Section 317 application and by the appellant subjecting himself before the Special Court; appeal allowed, impugned order set aside, appellant directed to be released on bail on furnishing two sureties with a bond of Rs.5,000/- and on appearing before the Special Court on all hearing dates.

¶1

Crl.A. No.217 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 12.03.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH and THE NONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR

¶6

Criminal Appeal No.217 of 2025

SURESH

.. Appellant

Vs.

The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By, The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Q Branch, Dharmapuri.

¶11

.. Respondent

¶12

¶13

Prayer : Criminal Appeal filed under Section 34 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002, to set aside the order in Crl.M.P.No.2665 of 2024 in Spl.S.C.No. 3 of 2022 dated 19.12.2024 on the file of the Special Court under Prevention of Terrorism Act, Poonamalle, chennai and enlarge the appellant on bail.

¶14

¶15

For Appellant : Mr.R.Sankarasubbu

¶16

For Respondent : Mr.S.Raja kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ________Page 1/7

¶18

Crl.A. No.217 of 2025

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

(delivered by N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.)

¶21

The present criminal appeal is filed challenging the order of the Special Court under Prevention of Terrorism Act, Poonamallee, Chennai, dated 19.12.2024 made in Crl.M.P.No.2665 of 2024 in Spl.SC No.3/2022.

¶22

The appellant/accused No.4 was charged for the offence under Section 148, 333, 307, 333 r/w Section 149 IPC and Section 307 IPC r/w Section 149 IPC, 307 IPC r/w Section 149 IPC and 120(B) of IPC r/w Section 3(2)(b) of POTA Act, 2002, Section 25(1B)(a) of the Arms Act, 1959 and Section 3(3), 3(5), 4(b), 22(1) of POTA Act, 2002. The trial was pending before the Special Court. The appellant was arrested on 24.11.2002 and was set at liberty on bail by this Hon'ble Court by its order dated 22.01.2007. During the pendency of the on going trial, the appellant could not appear before the Special Court on 13.11.2024, wherein the Special Court had issued a Non Bailable Warrant against the appellant. On the same day, the appellant filed a petition under Section 317 Cr.P.C. However, the Special Court had dismissed the same and remanded the appellant/accused to judicial custody on

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ________Page 2/7

¶24

________Page 2/7

¶25

Crl.A. No.217 of 2025

¶26

24.11.2024. Consequently, a petition to enlarge the appellant on bail was filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C and the same was dismissed on 19.12.2024 in

¶27

Crl.M.P.No.2665 of 2024. Challenging the said order, the present appeal is filed.

¶28

Admittedly, the appellant/accused was under incarceration for about four years and thereafter bail was granted. Mr.R.Sankarasubbu, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant would contend that, when an accused could not appear before the court and an application under Section 317 of Cr.P.C is filed, the normal practice of the court is to accept the application and grant permission. Per contra, the court had dismissed the application and has issued a Non Bailable Warrant and remanded the appellant to judicial custody on 24.11.2024 and from thereafter, the accused is in jail.

¶29

There is substantial force in the argument advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant contending that when a Non Bailable Warrant was issued on 13.11.2024, despite an application was filed under Section 317 Cr.P.C., the trial Court had dismissed the same. The absence of the appellant/accused was bona fide by filing the application under Section

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ________Page 3/7

¶31

________Page 3/7

¶32

Crl.A. No.217 of 2025

¶33

317 Cr.P.C. and he has subjected himself before the Special Court to demonstrate his bona fides to show before the Special Court that he is appearing before the special court.

¶34

In view of the same, this appeal is allowed and the order of the Special Court under Prevention of Terrorism Act, Poonamallee, Chennai, dated 19.12.2024 made in Crl.M.P.No.2665 of 2024 in Spl.S.C. No.3/2022, is set aside. Consequently, the appellant shall be released on bail on condition that he shall furnish two sureties on execution of a bond to the value of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only), with a further condition that the appellant shall appear before the Special Court under Prevention of Terrorism Act, Poonamallee, Chennai, on all hearing dates.

¶35

Note:Issue order copy on 13.03.2025 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No Anu

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ________Page 4/7

¶37

________Page 4/7

¶38

Crl.A. No.217 of 2025

¶39

¶40