SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

Daily Archive: July 2, 2022

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Crl.R.C.No.654 of 2022 Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C., does not place any fetter on the Police to conduct further investigation in the case after commencement of trial and whenever they come across any additional information it is just and necessary that the same be brought to the notice of the Court.  It is important to note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya Vs. the State of Gujarat (cited supra) itself has clearly held that the purpose of further investigation is that any person who has wrongly been prosecuted cannot suffer the same and any person, who was actually committed the offence, should not escape punishment.  In that view of the matter, since bringing out the truth is the primordial purpose of investigation and the present application serves the said purpose, I am of the view that the application filed by the prosecution even after the commencement of the trial in this case is maintainable and I answered the question accordingly.

Uncategorized

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Crl.R.C.No.654 of 2022 Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C., does not place any fetter on the Police to conduct further investigation in the case after commencement of trial and whenever they come across any additional information it is just and necessary that the same be brought to the notice of the Court.  It is important to note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya Vs. the State of Gujarat (cited supra) itself has clearly held that the purpose of further investigation is that any person who has wrongly been prosecuted cannot suffer the same and any person, who was actually committed the offence, should not escape punishment.  In that view of the matter, since bringing out the truth is the primordial purpose of investigation and the present application serves the said purpose, I am of the view that the application filed by the prosecution even after the commencement of the trial in this case is maintainable and I answered the question accordingly.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS   Reserved on :  22.06.2022   Pronounced on :   01.07.2022   CORAM :   THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Crl.R.C.No.654 of 2022     Ganesan                          ...

உரிய சிகிச்சைக்கு பிறகே ரிவால்டோ யானை காட்டில் விடப்பட்டதாக தமிழக govt pleader Muthukamar தெரிவித்தார். Case dismissed cj bencj

Uncategorized

உரிய சிகிச்சைக்கு பிறகே ரிவால்டோ யானை காட்டில் விடப்பட்டதாக தமிழக govt pleader Muthukamar தெரிவித்தார். Case dismissed cj bencj

உரிய சிகிச்சைக்கு பிறகே ரிவால்டோ யானை காட்டில் விடப்பட்டதாக தமிழக முதன்மை தலைமை வனப் பாதுகாவலர் தெரிவித்ததை ஏற்றுக்கொண்ட சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்றம், அதுதொடர்பான வழக்கை முடித்துவைத்துள்ளது. தும்பிக்கை சுருங்கி சுவாச பிரச்னையால் பாதிக்கப்பட்டு, மசினக்குடி பகுதியில் சுற்றி வந்த ரிவால்டோ யானைக்கு கடந்த ஆண்டு ஜூலை...

This Court in a judgment reported in CDJ 2006 MHC 1948 PALANI & OTHERS Vs. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PUDHUKOTTAI POLICE STATION AND OTHERS has held that passing a common order against the members of the two parties is not in accordance with law.  As per Section 116 of the Code of Criminal Procedure a joint enquiry can be held only in respect of members or association of the same group but not against the members of two rival groups.  Clubbing both the groups in one proceedings and directing them to face a joint enquiry is not in accordance with law. In such a view of the matter, this Court is inclined to grant the relief sought for by the petitioner. SATHISH KUMAR, J mvs. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the order dated 9/12/2021, made in M.C.No.126/2021/Aa1 passed by the Sub-divisional

Uncategorized

This Court in a judgment reported in CDJ 2006 MHC 1948 PALANI & OTHERS Vs. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PUDHUKOTTAI POLICE STATION AND OTHERS has held that passing a common order against the members of the two parties is not in accordance with law.  As per Section 116 of the Code of Criminal Procedure a joint enquiry can be held only in respect of members or association of the same group but not against the members of two rival groups.  Clubbing both the groups in one proceedings and directing them to face a joint enquiry is not in accordance with law. In such a view of the matter, this Court is inclined to grant the relief sought for by the petitioner. SATHISH KUMAR, J mvs. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the order dated 9/12/2021, made in M.C.No.126/2021/Aa1 passed by the Sub-divisional

ÁIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated:  23/6/2022 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR Crl. O.P. No.5361 of 2022 a n d M.P.No.2923 of 2022 SelvaArasan Ranjithkumar...

Considering the said fact, I am of the view that the period of imprisonment imposed by the Trial Court for the offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code can be modified as from ten years rigorous imprisonment to seven years rigorous imprisonment. The sentence imposed by the Trial Court in all other respects are confirmed.           Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is partly allowed. Index : yes/no                                                                             22.06.2022 Speaking order/Non-speaking order drm To The Sessions Judge Mahila Court, Chengalpet. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY. J.,   drm

Uncategorized

Considering the said fact, I am of the view that the period of imprisonment imposed by the Trial Court for the offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code can be modified as from ten years rigorous imprisonment to seven years rigorous imprisonment. The sentence imposed by the Trial Court in all other respects are confirmed.           Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is partly allowed. Index : yes/no                                                                             22.06.2022 Speaking order/Non-speaking order drm To The Sessions Judge Mahila Court, Chengalpet. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY. J.,   drm

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS   DATED : 22.06.2022   CORAM :   THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Crl.A.No.103 of 2019   Mari                                                                        ..          Appellant Vs The State...

Judges mahadevan j judge Athikesavalu இந்து சமய அறநிலையத்துறை கோவில்களுக்கு சொந்தமான சொத்துகள் மூலம் வருகின்ற வருவாயை முறையாக வசூலித்தால், தமிழக அரசால் பற்றாக்குறை இல்லாத பட்ஜெட்டை தாக்கல் செய்ய முடியும் என சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்றம் தெரிவித்துள்ளது.

Uncategorized

Judges mahadevan j judge Athikesavalu இந்து சமய அறநிலையத்துறை கோவில்களுக்கு சொந்தமான சொத்துகள் மூலம் வருகின்ற வருவாயை முறையாக வசூலித்தால், தமிழக அரசால் பற்றாக்குறை இல்லாத பட்ஜெட்டை தாக்கல் செய்ய முடியும் என சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்றம் தெரிவித்துள்ளது.

  இந்து சமய அறநிலையத்துறை கோவில்களுக்கு சொந்தமான சொத்துகள் மூலம் வருகின்ற வருவாயை முறையாக வசூலித்தால், தமிழக அரசால் பற்றாக்குறை இல்லாத பட்ஜெட்டை தாக்கல் செய்ய முடியும் என சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்றம் தெரிவித்துள்ளது. கோவில் சிலைகள் மற்றும் நகைகள் பாதுகாப்புத் தொடர்பாக உயர் நீதிமன்றம் தாமாக...

WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com