Chennai Court March 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.
R. Paramasivanand Others Vs. State rep by The Inspector of Police, Tir ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-16-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the entire records relating to the proceedings of the FIR in Crime No.20 of 2016 on the file of the 1st respondent police and quash the same.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking to quash the case registered in Crime No.20 of 2016 on the file of the 1st respondent police, pursuant to the amicable settlement effected between the parties. 2. It is seen that a case in Crime No.20 of 2016 for the alleged offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 323 IPC r/w 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2) (V(a)) of SC/ST (POA) ACt, has been registered against the petitioners/A1 to A3. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the petitioners/A1 to A3 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. Learned counsel appearing for the pa...
A. Steepen Vs. The State represented by the Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-16-2016
S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant, the unblessed son of a poor family, educated by his poor parents, on becoming an Engineer, secured a decent job, earned hand full of money, fell in love with one Sangeetha, married her with the wishes of both families, blessed with a male child, took care of his old village parents and lived a life with full of joy and jubilation, would not have even imagined that a severe blow to his life was fast approaching to make a complete topsy turvy. 2 He was living with his loving wife and five years old son, in a rental house at West Mambalam, Chennai. His aged parents were living in a remote village near Vellore. His father is an Ex-serviceman with no other property. His parents-in-law were residing at No.21, Dhanapal Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. 2a. On 20.10.2008, the appellant received a message that his father had fallen ill. As a responsible son, in order to take him for treatment, he immediately rushed to his native place in his car along with his w...
Ramasubbu and Others Vs. The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-16-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records in C.C.No.84 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Madurai and quash the charge sheet and the consequential further proceedings insofar as the Petitioners are concerned.) 1. This petition has been filed to call for the records in C.C.No.84 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Madurai and quash the charge sheet and the consequential further proceedings insofar as the Petitioners are concerned. 2. Heard Mr.K.Chellapandian, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the respondent on 15.03.2016 and posted the matter to 16.03.2016 for arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners. 3. As this Court was not inclined to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.84 of 2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai, Madurai District, learned counsel for the petitioners/accused seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this petition and h...
M. Dhamotharan Vs. State rep by the Superintendent of Police, Virudhun ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-16-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent to file final report in connection with Crime No.21 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police.) 1. This petition has been filedto direct the 2nd respondent to file final report in connection with Crime No.21 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police. 2. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that if six months' time is granted by this Court, the investigation would be completed and final report would be filed by the respondent before the concerned Court. The said statement is recorded. 3. In view of the above the Criminal Original Petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent police to complete the investigation and to file a final report before the concerned jurisdictional Court within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order....
Padma Vs. The Commissioner of Police Greater, Chennai and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-15-2016
(Prayer: Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to produce the detenue, namely, minor Gayathri, who is aged about 16 years, before this Court, who is now under the illegal custody of the respondents 3 to 5, and to set her at liberty.) M. Jaichandren, J. 1. This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed, by the mother of the detenue, praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to produce the detenue, namely, minor Gayathri, aged about 16 years, who is said to be now under the illegal custody of the respondents 3 to 5, before this Court and to set her at liberty. 2. The petitioner has stated that the detenue, who is her younger daughter, had studied upto Xth standard. Thereafter, she has been working in an export Company. While so, she had gone missing, since, 15.02.2016. Therefore, the petitioner had lodged a complaint be...
Adhilakshmi and Another Vs. Union of India, owning Southern Railway, R ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-15-2016
(Prayer : Civil Revision Petition (NPD) filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set-aside the impugned order, dated 17.04.2005, in I.A.No.15 of 2015 in Dy.No.23 of 2015 on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench. The Railway Claims Tribunal dismissed the application, seeking condonation of delay of 1,826 days in filing the petition for compensation on the ground that the towering delay of more than five years cannot be condoned, as the conduct of the petitioners only reflect complacency and negligence.) 1.1. This order is under challenge in this revision petition. 2. It is the contention of the Southern Railway / respondent herein that, as per Section 17 (b) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, the Application for compensation for death or injury to any person ought to have been filed within one year from the date of accident, i.e., when the accident was on 03.02.2009 and the consequent death of the breadwinner, having occurred on 16.02.2009, the App...
Subbiah and Others Vs. The Superintendent of Police and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-15-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 1st respondent suitably to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case on the basis of the petitioner's complaint dated 15.11.2015 and to investigate the matter in accordance with law.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 1st respondent suitably to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case on the basis of the petitioner's complaint dated 15.11.2015 and to investigate the matter in accordance with law. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State, who would submit that on the complaint dated 15.11.2015, given by the petitioner, a petition enquiry was conducted and the same was subsequently closed on 05.12.2015. A copy of the closure report has been furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner across the bar. Recording the same, this Criminal Original Petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner t...
V.R. Nagarajan Vs. The Commissioner of Police, Madurai
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-15-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent to register a criminal case against the accused based on the complaint dated 20.01.2016 by the petitioner and to take action against the accused in accordance with law.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register a criminal case against the accused based on the complaint dated 20.01.2016 by the petitioner and to take action against the accused in accordance with law. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State, who would submit that on the complaint dated 20.01.2016, given by the petitioner, a petition enquiry was conducted and the same was subsequently closed. Recording the same, this Criminal Original Petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy before the appropriate forum in the manner known to law. The respondent police is directed to send a c...
Suresh and Others Vs. State by Inspector of Police, Salem
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-15-2016
(Common Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., against the judgment and conviction passed in S.C.No.153 of 2011 on 22.06.2012 by the learned II Additional District Sessions Judge, Salem.) Common Judgment: S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. Accused 1,2,4,5 to 9 in S.C.No.153 of 2011 dated 22.06.2012 on the file of the learned II Additional District Sessions Judge, Salem are the appellants in Crl.A.No.402 of 2012. A.3 in S.C.No.153 of 2011 dated 22.06.2012 on the file of the learned II Additional District Sessions Judge, Salem is the appellant in Crl.A.No.445 of 2012. The trial Court framed charges under Section 148 I.P.C., against A.1 and A.2; for offence under Section 147 I.P.C., against A.3 to A.9 and for offence under Sections 302 r/w 149 and 201 I.P.C., against A.1 to A.9. By judgment dated 22.06.2012, the trial Court convicted the accused under all the charges and sentenced them as under:- ad>AccusedSection of lawSentenceAccused 1,2, 3 and 5302 I.P.C.,Imprisonment for life an...
Rani Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by its Secretary to the Governme ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-15-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus calling for the entire records leading to the detention of the petitioner's son Joseph @ shutter Joseph son of Manoharan male aged about 24 years is presently lodged in Central Prison Puzhal at Chennai and has been detained under Act 14/82 as a Goonda vide detention order dated 20.8.2015 on the file of the 2nd respondent herein, made in BDFGISSSV No.764/2015 quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to produce the body and person of the said detenu before this Court and thereafter set him at liberty from the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.) M. Jaichandren, J. 1. This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the mother of the detenu, namely, Joseph @ shutter Joseph, aged 24 years, son of Manoharan, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records in BDFGISSSV No.764/2015, dated 20.8.2015, passed by the 2nd respondent, detaining the detenu, under Section...