STATE Vs. S BALASUBRAMANIAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE criminal original petitions and criminal miscellaneous petitions are disposed of together by a common order since they relate to the same case though two of the accused involved in the crime are different. In Crl. O. P. No. 13738 of 1992, preferred by the State represented by the Inspector of Police, CBI/scb, Madras, the prayer is to cancel bail in the event of arrest granted in favour of respondent K. Srinivasan by the Principal sessions Judge, Madras by his order dated 29. 9. 1992 made in Crl. M. P. No. 4656 of 1992 Criminal O. P. No. 13739of 1992 is a similar petition filed by the same inspector of Police to cancel bail in the event of arrest ordered in favour of accused S. Balasubramaniam by the Principal Sessions Judge, Madras, by his order dated 1. 10. 1992 made in Crl. M. P. No. 4705 of 1992.

(2.) CRL. O. P. No. 13310 of 1992 is again a petition by the same Inspector of Police to set aside that portion of the order made by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Madras in CRL. M. P. No. 4705 of 1992 directing the respondent/accused S. Balasubramaniam to appear for interrogation along with his counsel. CRL. M. P. No. 7117of l992 is yet another petition filed by the same inspector of Police for stay of operation of the order in CRL. M. P. No. 4705 of 1992 passed by the court of Sessions in favour of, respondent s. Balasubramaniam, pending disposal of CRL. O. P. No. 13310 of 1992.

(3.) IT is the case of Investigating Officer that respondent Balasubramaniam and his counsel were intimated over telephone of the order of stay obtained from this Court. However, on 13. 10. 1992 and 16. 10. 1992, investigating officer received telegrams from Abdul Malick and Abdul Nazeer, counsel representing both the respondents as though the respondents had appeared before the Investigating Officer on 13. 10. 1992 along with their advocate, when they were asked to go away without signing and directed to present themselves for interrogation, as and when required in future, by the investigating officer. The second telegram refers to certain telephone calls received from the office of the investigating agency administering threats not to bring their counsel. A written notice was requested by the respondents.