Follow:
- Next story கொடுங்குற்ற வழக்குகளில் சாட்சிகளாக உள்ள குழந்தைகளை உளவியல் ரீதியாக பாதுகாப்பது தொடர்பாக வழிகாட்டி விதிமுறைகளை
- Previous story Considering the facts and circumstances and also considering the submissions made by learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case to quash the FIR in Crime No.44 of 2025 under Sections 528 of BNSS, since due to previous enmity between the petitioner and the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Udhagamandalam and his spouse, who is working as Subordinate Judge, Ooty, Judicial Officers of Ooty, with their influence, a false case has been registered against the petitioner. Hence, the FIR in Crime No.44 of 2025 is hereby quashed and accordingly quashed. 9. In view of the above, the Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 04.08.2025 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No ms To 1. The Inspector of Police, T-3 Ooty Town West Police Station, Nilgiris District. 2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. P.VELMURUGAN, J ms Crl.O.P.No.21695 of 2025 04.08.2025
Recent Posts
- CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI Crl.O.P.(MD).No.23251 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.(MD)Nos.20158 and 20160 of 2025 Saravanaperumal … Petitioner/Accused Vs. 1. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Pudukkottai District. Crime No.25 of 2017 … Respondents / Complainants 2. Anandanayaki … Respondent / Defacto Complainant Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the
- In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. The FIR in Crime No.39 of 2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Madurai District, registered for the offences under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC, corresponding to Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 61(2) BNS, 2023, is quashed as against the petitioners. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. The interim stay already granted stands made absolute. 30.04.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Sml To 1. The Inspector of Police, DCB, Madurai District. 2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
- Mmsj rskj pudukotai new court building mmsj excellent speech video
- Judge Victoria Gowri refused to quash because: prosecution has more than just co-accused statement, conscious possession is disputed fact for trial, prima facie case exists, and it doesn’t meet SC’s _Bhajan Lal_ criteria for quashing. So case must go to trial.
- Judge victoriya gowri This Court finds: (a) prosecution is not shown to rest solely on co-accused confession; (b) disputed questions of conscious possession arise; (c) prima facie materials exist requiring trial; (d) case does not fall within State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal20 categories.
More
Recent Posts
- CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI Crl.O.P.(MD).No.23251 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.(MD)Nos.20158 and 20160 of 2025 Saravanaperumal … Petitioner/Accused Vs. 1. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Pudukkottai District. Crime No.25 of 2017 … Respondents / Complainants 2. Anandanayaki … Respondent / Defacto Complainant Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the
- In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. The FIR in Crime No.39 of 2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Madurai District, registered for the offences under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC, corresponding to Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 61(2) BNS, 2023, is quashed as against the petitioners. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. The interim stay already granted stands made absolute. 30.04.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Sml To 1. The Inspector of Police, DCB, Madurai District. 2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
- Mmsj rskj pudukotai new court building mmsj excellent speech video
- Judge Victoria Gowri refused to quash because: prosecution has more than just co-accused statement, conscious possession is disputed fact for trial, prima facie case exists, and it doesn’t meet SC’s _Bhajan Lal_ criteria for quashing. So case must go to trial.
- Judge victoriya gowri This Court finds: (a) prosecution is not shown to rest solely on co-accused confession; (b) disputed questions of conscious possession arise; (c) prima facie materials exist requiring trial; (d) case does not fall within State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal20 categories.