Follow:
- Next story Full order advt tanuja case -THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Reserved on Pronounced on 17.06.2021 18.06.2021 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI CRL. O.P. NO. 10387 OF 2021 1. Tanuja Rajan @ Tanuja Kanthula 2. Preeti Rajan .. Petitioners – Vs – 1. State, rep. By Inspector of Police G-7, Chetpet Police Station Chennai 600 031. 2. Bar Council of Tamil Nadu Chennai. .. Respondents (R-2 impleaded vide order of Court dated 15.6.2021) Criminal Original Petition filed u/s 438 Cr.P. C. praying this Court to enlarge the petitioners/accused on bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police in Crime No.192 of 2021 pending investigation before the respondent. For Petitioners : Ms. A.Louisal Ramesh For Respondent : Mr. A.Gopinath, GA (Crl. Side) for R-1 Mr. Haja Mohideen Gisthi for R-2 ORDER Lady Justice is the allegorical personification of the moral force in judicial systems. Her attributes are a blindfold, a beam balance, and a sword and the balance denotes that justice needs to be delivered with eyes closed and ears open. True to the said analogy, which has been followed time immemorial, the justice delivery system in our country is following the same to deliver impartial justice to one and all without reference to any of their personal traits. —In the result, the following orders are passed in this criminal original petition:- i) This criminal original petition, insofar as the 1st petitioner is concerned is dismissed for the reasons aforesaid; ii) Insofar as the 2nd petitioner is concerned, this criminal original petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on her surrendering before the respondent police within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) before the respondent police; iii) The 2nd respondent, in consultation with the Bar Council of India, in the larger interest of the legal fraternity, shall look into the issue of evolving a mechanism for initiation of suo motu proceedings against such of those members, who indulge in activities, which are prejudicial and demeaning the interest of the legal fraternity as a whole; iv) Registry is directed to initiate suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against Mr.R.Krishnamoorthy, Advocate, Supreme Court of India, No.214, New Lawyers Chambers, M.C.Setalwad Block, Supreme Court of India Campus, New Delhi 110 001, by issuing statutory notice; v) After issuing statutory notice to the said Mr.R.Krishnamoorthy, Registry is directed to place the matter before the Hon’ble The Chief Justice for listing the suo motu criminal contempt before the appropriate Bench.
- Previous story Move aimed at saving paddy from getting soaked in rain The Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation (TNCSC) on Thursday informed the Madras High Court of its decision to operate mobile Direct Purchase Centres (DPCs) to procure paddy that meets the prescribed minimum quality standards from registered farmers. The submission was made following a suo motu public interest litigation petition taken up by the court to prevent the harvest from getting soaked in rain. Appearing before the first Division Bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, Advocate General R. Shunmugasundaram said TNCSC Managing Director V. Rajaraman had written to him on June 14, stating that the corporation would make arrangements for operating mobile DPCs so that the harvest does not get soaked before the farmers could transport their produce to the 282 regulated markets in the State.
Recent Posts
- Supreme Court has reiterated that the mere non-registration of a will cannot be treated as a circumstance casting suspicion on its genuineness, emphasizing that Indian law does not mandate registration of wills
- Pmla case anitha radakrishnan
- Justice Pugalendhi noted that both the high court and the Supreme Court, in similar petitions, have recognised the labour inspector’s right to confer permanent status on eligible employees.
- The Supreme Court on Friday modified its March 11 order that had directed the Centre, states and others to disassociate from three academics, following a row over an NCERT book chapter containing “offending” contents on corruption in the judiciary.
- Ipr case Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, by an order dated April 29, 2026, said the organiser would not be permitted to proceed with the events unless it either paid the amount claimed by IPRS or created a fixed deposit in favour of the registrar general of the high court.
More
Recent Posts
- Supreme Court has reiterated that the mere non-registration of a will cannot be treated as a circumstance casting suspicion on its genuineness, emphasizing that Indian law does not mandate registration of wills
- Pmla case anitha radakrishnan
- Justice Pugalendhi noted that both the high court and the Supreme Court, in similar petitions, have recognised the labour inspector’s right to confer permanent status on eligible employees.
- The Supreme Court on Friday modified its March 11 order that had directed the Centre, states and others to disassociate from three academics, following a row over an NCERT book chapter containing “offending” contents on corruption in the judiciary.
- Ipr case Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, by an order dated April 29, 2026, said the organiser would not be permitted to proceed with the events unless it either paid the amount claimed by IPRS or created a fixed deposit in favour of the registrar general of the high court.