Chennai 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.
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....
K. Ganesh Vs. C. Arasukumar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, to condone the delay of 122 days in filing the above Criminal Revision SR.No.5074 of 2016 against the order passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, FTC, Alandur dated 04.07.2015 in Crl.M.P.No.1284 of 2015 in C.C.No.144 of 2014.) 1. The Petitioner/Accused has preferred the instant Crl.M.P.No.1413 of 2016 praying for passing of an order by this Court to condone the delay of 122 days in filing the Criminal Revision in SR.5074 of 2016. 2. According to the Petitioner/Accused, the Respondent/Complainant had filed a Petition under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act by using forged documents and further, the Respondent/Complainant had failed to explain the different signatures in Ex.P1/Pro-note etc. 3. The stand of the Petitioner/Accused is that he filed a Petition in Crl.Mp.No.1284 of 2015 on the file of the trial Court under Section 293 of the Criminal Procedure Code and also under Section 45 of the Indian ...
K.R. Anantha Kumar Vs. The Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious an ...
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 declaration that the lands in Survey Nos.152/1, 143/1, 145/2, 145/3, 145/4, 150/1, 150/4, 175/4, 152/2, 158/2, 81/1, 82/1, 90/3, 140/1, 159/1 and 142/2 that was taken away by the second respondent without following due process of law is against law and unsustainable and further direct the respondent to hand over the property to the petitioner and pass further orders as this may deem fit and proper. Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to give electricity service connection to the petitioner with regard to Door No.1/8-1 Plot No.4, in Krishna Nagar, Cholan Maligai Village in S.No.145/4B, Kumbakonam taluk, Thanjavur District and pass further orders as this may deem fit and proper.) Common Order 1. W.P(MD)No.2233 of 2015 has been filed seeking a Writ of Decl...
The President, South Kadayam I Grade Panchayat, Tirunelveli District V ...
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 second respondent to dispose of the appeal pending on his file in the O.Mu.No.K2/27230/2015 dated 03.06.2015 under 12 Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act, with respect of Survey No.562/3 situated at Therku Kadayam Village, Ambasamudram Taluk, Tirunelveli District within the stipulated period as fixed by this Court and pass further orders as this may deem fit and proper.) 1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent to dispose of the appeal pending on his file in the O.Mu.No.K2/27230/2015 dated 03.06.2015 under 12 Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act, with respect of Survey No.562/3 situated at Therku Kadayam Village, Ambasamudram Taluk, Tirunelveli District. 2. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that the second respondent h...
Petitioner Vs. Respondent
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
P.N. Prakash, J. 1. For the sake of convenience, the parties would be referred to as the complainant and the accused. 2. The complainant launched a prosecution in C.C.Nos.51 and 52 of 2014 before the learned Fast Track Court (Magisterial Level), Thoothukudi against the accused for an offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. After a full fledged trial, C.C.Nos.51 and 52 of 2014 were dismissed by the Trial Court on 20.08.2014 holding that the complainant had failed to prove that there is no legally enforceable debt between him and the accused. Aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal dated 20.08.2014 passed by the Trial Court, the complainant filed Criminal Appeals along with petitions for leave to file in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.21854 of 2014 in Crl.A.(MD) No.SR.No.34321 of 2014 and Crl.O.P.(MD) No.21104 of 2014 in Crl.A.(MD) SR.No.34320 of 2014 before this Court. 3. When the Special Leave Petitions came up for admission before this Court, a learned Single Judge of this Court went...
Anthony John Paul Vs. The State rep. by it's Inspector of Police Karim ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer:Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment of conviction and sentence made in S.C.No.20 of 2013 by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri, dated 25.04.2013.) S.Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the 2nd accused in S.C. No.20 of 2013 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri. Including the appellant, there were totally three accused in the present case in Crime No.1044 of 2010. The Trial Court framed eight charges against the accused Nos. 1 to 3, as detailed below:- ad>Sl.No.Charge No.Rank of AccusedCharged for the Offence1Charge No.1Accused Nos.1 and 2U/s. 307 IPC2Charge No.2Accused No.3U/s. 307 r/w. 109 IPC3Charge No.3Accused No.2U/s. 302 IPC4Charge No.4Accused No.3U/s.302 r/w. 109 IPC5Charge No.5Accused No.1U/s.302 r/w.34 IPC6Charge No.6Accused No.2U/s. 307 IPC7Charge No.7Accused No.3U/s. 307 r/w. 109 IPC8Charge No.8Accused No.1U/s. 307 r/w. 34 IPC By judgment, dated...
Mari @ Muthu @ Marimuthu and Another Vs. State Represented by The Insp ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision is filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the life sentence imposed by the learned VI Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai in S.C.No.380 of 2011 dated 06.02.2013 on the accused and seeks to enhance sentence of life imprisonment to capital punishment.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant, the sole accused in S.C.No.380 of 2011, on the file of the VI Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai, who stands convicted and sentenced for offence under Sections 302 and 380 I.P.C., has come up with this criminal appeal. By judgment dated 06.02.2013, the trial Court has sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life (no fine was imposed) for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years for the offence under Section 380 I.P.C. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: 2.1. The deceased in this case was one Mrs.Nachaal a young woman aged 28 years. She was married to P.W.2 and she had a femal...
V. Bala Vijayakumar and Another Vs. State Represented by, The Inspecto ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the entire records pertaining to the case in C.C.No.13 of 2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District and quash the same.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking to call for the entire records pertaining to the case in C.C.No.13 of 2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District and quash the same. 2. It is seen that a case in Crime No.110 of 2014 for the alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(i) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Harassment of Women Act on the file of the 1st respondent police, has been registered against the petitioners/accused. After completion of the investigation, the 1st respondent has filed a charge sheet, which was duly taken on file in C.C.No.13 of 2015 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the petitio...
Shaiju Thanga Kumar and Others Vs. The Inspector of Police, Kanyakumar ...
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 relating to the impugned charge sheet laid in C.C.No.75 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Padmanabhapuram quash the same.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking to call for the records relating to the impugned charge sheet laid in C.C.No.75 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Padmanabhapuram quash the same. 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that it would suffice, if a direction is issued to the Magistrate to complete the trial in C.C.No.75 of 2014 in a time bound manner. 3. Accepting the submission, learned Judicial Magistrate, Padmanabhapuram is directed to complete the trial in C.C.No.75 of 2014 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order provided all the accused co-operate in conduct of the trial by cross examining witnesses contemporaneously after ...
Koopalli and Others Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-07-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus calling for the records in S.C.No.88/2015 dated 13.10.2015 on the file of the 2nd respondent herein and quash the same and direct the respondents herein to produce the body of the petitioner's cousin son R.Manjunath @ Manju, son of Ramappaa aged 24 years, now confined in Central Prison, Salem, before this Court and set him at liberty.) M. Jaichandren, J. 1. This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the paternal uncle of the detenu, namely, R.Manjunath @ Manju, aged 24 years, son of Ramappaa, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records in S.C.No.88/2015 dated 13.10.2015, passed by the 2nd respondent, detaining the detenu, under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyber Law Offenders, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pir...
- ‹ Prev
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- Next ›
- Last »