HC sets aside single judge order

Holding it 'unjustifiable', The Madras High Court today set aside a single judge order directing a lower court not to proceed with the bail application filed by IPS officer Varunkumar, who surrendered before it here on April 28.
"If any judicial order is passed suo motu which is out of prayer by invoking Court's inherent power, those orders should not be prejudicial to the interest of the opposite Party," said Justice C S Karnan, who heard the Criminal Revision Case filed by Varunkumar.
In his order, the judge said after an intervening period of two years, the act of the police in seeking custodial interrogation of the accused can only be viewed as an afterthought, as it has been filed belatedly.

The Judge said the Supreme Court has given an opportunity to Varunkumar to move regular bail application before the appropriate court after surrender.
He further said accordingly the accused had surrendered before the XIth Magistrate Court and he had been remanded in judicial custody and subsequently regular bail application was filed and "it is to be disposed of on topmost priority since it is an issue of paramount importance as the right to liberty which the accused has, cannot be denied."
"Varunkumar has sought bail before the trial and conviction and as such, he need not be incarcerated since he had enjoyed anticipatory bail which had been granted by this court, after obtaining a report from the police."

The court did not give an opportunity to the accused and stayed his bail application and 'as such it is unjustifiable', the judge said.

Justice T S Sivagnanam had earlier directed the Magistrate court not to proceed further on the bail application until further orders from the High Court.
The officer had surrendered before the XIth Metropolitan Magistrate Court on April 28, more than two months after the Supreme Court cancelled his anticipatory bail and directed him to surrender before a trial court in a dowry and woman harassment case. He was hospitalised the same day on a complaint of back pain.

Justice Sivagnanam gave the direction on a petition by his former girlfriend, who sought a direction to revise the April 29 order of the Magistrate, who dismissed the petition filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police (Anti Dowry Cell) for custodial interrogation of Varun Kumar.
The officer was accused of several charges, including dowry harassment by his former girlfriend. According to her, he had allegedly promised to marry her.