Elavarasan @ Pandian @ Vallavan vs State

S. Rajeswaran, J.—This Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the Life Convict seeking to suspend the sentence and grant Interim Bail for one month to the Petitioner/Appellant for the conviction and sentence imposed in S.C. No. 12 of 2001 on the file of the Sessions Court for Exclusive Trial of Bomb Blast Cases, Chennai at Poonamallee, pending disposal of the above said Criminal Appeal.

Though the Appellant raised various grounds to set aside the Order of conviction and sentence imposed on him, he seeks Interim Bail for one month on the ground that his father Balasundaram is not well. According to the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant, Petitioner''s father is 90 years old and is ailing, on and off he is admitted in the Hospital for treatment due to old age ailment and hence, he prays for granting one month interim bail to be granted to him to enable him to be with his father during his last days.

However, Mr Shunmugavelayutham, learned Public Prosecutor appealing for the State, while filing the Written Objections, would seriously oppose the prayer sought for by the Petitioner. In the Written Objections, the prosecution has detailed the number of cases in which this Petitioner is named as an Accused. It shows that there are about 19 cases filed against the Petitioner during the time when he was absconding. On instructions, the learned Public Prosecutor submits that initially this Petitioner was arrested on 8.3.1992 and was released on bail on 20.8.1992; thereafter, he was absconding and hence, absconding NSW was issued 20.7.1995 and again he was arrested on 6.8.1997 and granted bail on 4.11.1999 There again, since he was absconding, absconding NBW came to be issued on 12.7.2002 and he was arrested, by Special Task Force (STF) on 4.6.2004. It is the further case of the Public Prosecution that this Petitioner was involved in 17 cases including 20 cases registered against him and he is also the Founder of "Thamizhar Viduthalai Padai" which is a Naxalite organisation and a banned organization too. Therefore, he submits that granting leave to the Petitioner for a month, as prayed for, would definitely not be in the interest of the Petitioner himself as well as the State.

Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner/Appellant, in meeting out the points raised by the learned Public Prosecutor, submits that though the Petitioner was arrested in all the cases, almost all the cases ended in acquittal and he was not an absconding Accused as he was in custody in other cases. He also submits that Petitioner is not the founder of any organization, much less, the banned organization and that the so called "Thamizhar Viduthalai Padai" does not exist now.

Be that as it may. In view of the strong objections raised by the learned Public Prosecutor, while reiterating the averments made in the Written Objections, we are not inclined to consider the request of the Petitioner for Interim Bail for a period of one month However, we would like to grant him a day''s Parole to visit his ailing father. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that this Court may grant him at least two days'' Parole on 24.10.2014 and 25.10.2014 instead of one day But we would order any a day''s Parole.

Accordingly, we pass the following Order:

"While rejecting the claim of the Petitioner for grant of Interim Bail for a month, we hereby permit the Petitioner to go out of jail, on Parole, for a day on 24.10.2014 between 8.00 a.m. and 7.30 p.m. to visit his ailing father. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Trichy, where the Petitioner is now lodged, should make all arrangements to provide sufficient escort to this life convict for his safety and security from 8.00 a.m. on 24.10.2014, when he leaves the Central Prison, Trichy, to travel to Jayamkondam where his father resides, till 7.30 p.m. in the evening of 24.10.2014, when he shall be lodged in the Central Prison, Trichy. They shall allow the Petitioner to be with his ailing father either at the hospital or at his residence. It is made clear that the cost of escorts and other security shall be borne by the State."

Post the matter on 27.10.2014 for "Reporting Compliance".

s Order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned.