(1.) The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.321 of 2009 on the file of the respondent-Police for an offence under Section 379 I.P.C. He was arrested and later on released on bail on the orders of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Gobichettipalayam on certain conditions and on execution of a bond with two sureties. The petitioner complied with the conditions and came out of prison. As per the condition imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate on 27.10.2009, the petitioner is required to appear before the learned Magistrate everyday at 10.00 a.m, until further orders. But, on 30.10.2009, the petitioner did not appear before the Magistrate. Therefore, the learned Magistrate cancelled the bail on the ground that the condition was not complied with. Simultaneously, the learned Magistrate issued a non-bailable warrant for the arrest and production of the accused before the Court. Subsequently, it appears that the petitioner approached the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Erode under Section 438 Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in execution of the said non bailable warrant. The said petition was rightly returned by the learned Sessions Judge by order dated 27.01.2009. Thereafter, he has approached this Court with this petition, challenging the order of the learned Magistrate cancelling the bail.
(2.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was hospitalised on 29.10.2009 as he had suddenly fallen ill and that was the reason why he could not appear before the Court. The learned counsel would further submit that the leaned Magistrate was not right in cancelling the bail without notice to the petitioner and without affording an opportunity to him. On these grounds, he would pray for setting aside the impugned order of the learned Magistrate.
(3.) The learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.N.R.Ilango would fairly submit that the learned Magistrate was not right in cancelling the bail without affording an opportunity to the petitioner.