Chennai Madurai Court April 2016 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
A. Ayyansamy Vs. The Tahsildar, Tiruchendur Taluk, Thoothukudi Distric ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the first respondent dated 01.03.2016 and quash the same as illegal and pass further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.) 1. The prayer in the Writ Petition is for a Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the first respondent dated 01.03.2016 and quash the same as illegal. 2. Mr.S.Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2. 3. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 4. After some elaborate arguments on both sides, the learned Counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that only insofar as the first clause in the order of the first respondent namely, to hand over the key to the police station, is alone objected. Both parties have decided to abide by the title as per the judgment to be...
Jagadheesh Pandian and Others Vs. State Represented by The Inspector o ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records originally in C.C.No.372 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.2, Madurai and now in C.C.No.84 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.6, Madurai and to quash the final report as against the petitioners, who have been arrayed as the accused.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking to call for the records originally in C.C.No.372 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.2, Madurai and now in C.C.No.84 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.6, Madurai and to quash the final report as against the petitioners, who have been arrayed as the accused. 2. It is seen that the FIR in this case has been registered on the complaint lodged by the Inspector, H.R.andC.E. Department. The case of the prosecution is that the Temple in question is administered by the H.R.andC.E. Department. On prior intelligence that monies are being stolen from the hundial, th...
C. Ponnian Vs. A. Francis Durai
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for records in C.C.No.253 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Valliyoor and quash the same.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking to call for the records in C.C.No.253 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Valliyoor and quash the same. 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that the trial has commenced and P.W.1 has been examined and cross examined by the accused. 3. Under such circumstances, it is not open for this Court to invoke inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at this stage to quash the prosecution. Moreover, all the points raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner are disputed questions of fact, which cannot be looked into in a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of S.Krishnamoorthy v. Chellammal, re...
Lakshmanan Vs. The Junior Engineer, Distribution/Urban, TANGEDCO, Tiru ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to give electricity supply to the petitioner's house in Door No.68, Rajamannar Street, situated at Thummarajapuram Village, Palayamkottai Taluk, Tirunelveli District without insisting NOC to be obtained from the second respondent and pass further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.) 1. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this Writ Petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. 2. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh writ petition after establishing the right over the property. No costs....
V. Joseph Manoharan Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kovilpatti Sub ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the fourth respondent to register the documents in revenue Survey Nos.496/3, 496/4 to the total extent of 6 acres without demanding any No Objection Certificate on the basis of orders in W.P(MD)No.17060 of 2015 according to law within the stipulated time limit and pass appropriate orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.) 1. The writ petitioner has not come to this Court with a clean hand. Though the petitioner has sought for Mandamus, his application was already rejected by the third respondent in his proceedings in e.f.vz;.3513/M1/2015 ehs;. 03.09.2015. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. The Registry is directed not to give the original impugned order to the petitioner....
S. Raja @ Parthiparajan Vs. State represented by, The Inspector of Pol ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the entire records pertaining to the case in Cr.No.301 of 2015 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Munnirpalayam Police Station, Tirunelveli District and quash the same.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking to call for the entire records pertaining to the case in Cr.No.301 of 2015 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Munnirpalayam Police Station, Tirunelveli District and quash the same. 2. It is seen that a case in Crime No.301 of 2015 for the alleged offences under Sections 294(B), 387 and 506(ii) IPC, has been registered against the petitioner/A1. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the petitioner/A1 and the second respondent, appeared in persons and their identifications were also verified by this Court, in addition to the confirmation of the identity of the parties by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) through the respondent police, namely, A.Nangaiyar, Special Sub-I...
Vasanthi Vs. The District Collector, Theni and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to provide relief amount to the petitioner under Rule 12(4) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 Schedule Annexure-I within the time stipulated by this Court and pass further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.) 1. The prayer in the Writ Petition is for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to provide relief amount to the petitioner under Rule 12(4) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 Schedule Annexure-I. 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the very F.I.R has been closed as 'Mistake of Fact' by filing a final report in Crime No.1 of 2013 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Theni, on 14.10.2015, and the same was also commu...
V. Harikrishnan Vs. State represented by the Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the learned Judicial Magistrate No.6, Trichy to take the charge sheet on file filed by the respondent in Crime No.19 of 2011 and proceed with the same in accordance with law.) 1. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. 2. In view of the above submission and endorsement made, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy in accordance with law....
Murugesan and Others Vs. State represented by The Inspector of Police, ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records pertaining to the case in Crime No. 157 of 2014 under sections 294(b) 323 506(i) of IPC pending investigation on the file of the 1st Respondent Police and quash the same.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking to call for the records pertaining to the case in Crime No. 157 of 2014 under sections 294(b) 323 506(i) of IPC pending investigation on the file of the 1st Respondent Police and quash the same. 2. It is seen that a case in Crime No.157 of 2014 for the alleged offences under Sections 294(b) 323 and 506(i) IPC, has been registered against the petitioners / A1 to A4. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the petitioners/Accused and the second respondent, appeared in persons and their identifications were also verified by this Court, in addition to the confirmation of the identity of the parties by the learned counsel for the petitioners, namely, Mr.R.Aravind Raj (Ent.No.697/2006)...
M. Karthik Vs. State represented by The Inspector of Police, Ramanadha ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the entire records connected with the case in Crime No.17 of 2016 pending on the file of the respondent police and quash the same.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking to call for the entire records connected with the case in Crime No.17 of 2016 pending on the file of the respondent police and quash the same. 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that investigation has been completed and a final report has also been filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Mudhukulathur on 03.02.2016 itself. 3. Recording the same, this petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to work out his liberty in accordance with law. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed....