R MUTHUMARI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner approaches this Court with a prayer to direct the 2nd respondent to release the petitioner forthwith who is lodged in Central Prison, Madurai in respect of Crime No. 415 of 2005 on the file of the 1 st respondent.

(2.) THE petitioner herein is an accused in Crime No. 415 of 2005 for the alleged offence under Section 366-A, 376, 342, 307 read with 34 of I.P.C. In pursuant to the said case the petitioner was remanded on 16.8.2005 and thereafter he was enlarged on bail by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. VI, Madurai. THEreafter the said case was taken on the file of Mahila Court, Madurai in S.C. No. 404 of 2006 and the same is pending.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the entire process adopted by the trial Court is one without jurisdiction. He has also submitted that until and unless a bail duly granted by a competent Court is cancelled the question of remanding an accused does not arise. He has further submitted that in the present case on hand admittedly the petitioner was produced on a P.T. warrant and the petitioner could not appear in view of the remand made in Crime No. 1039 of 2009. He has also submitted that in such an event a remand cannot be made. THE learned counsel in support of his contention has relied upon the judgment Appu alias Santhakumar and Others v. State represented by Inspector of Police, Palavanthangal Police Station, Chennai and Others (2004) MLJ (Crl.) 440, wherein this Court was pleased to observe that when a person who has already granted bail and produced under P.T. warrant he cannot be remanded but he can only be conveyed to prison. THE learned counsel further submitted that in the present case on hand the question of conveying to prison also does not arise since he has been enlarged on bail. THErefore the learned counsel for the petitioner sought for setting aside the order of remand.