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.
R.P.S. Rajini Balaguru Vs. The Commissioner of Police, Madurai and Oth ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-06-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 1st respondent to instruct the 2nd respondent to give police protection for the life and limb of the petitioner on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 01.02.2016.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 1st respondent to instruct the 2nd respondent to give police protection for the life and limb of the petitioner on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 01.02.2016. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that he has a civil Court decree in O.S.No.868 of 2003 dated 11.01.2008 passed by the Additional District Munsif Court, Madurai Town in his favour, despite which, the 3rd respondent is causing trouble to the petitioner. In this regard, the petitioner has given a complaint to the respondent police by post. 4. Under such circumstances, the petitio...
Ramu Vs. The District Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-06-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to transfer the investigation of Crime No.18 of 2016 dated 26.01.2016 on the file of the Tiruppachethi Police Station from the 3rd Respondent to the 2nd Respondent or any other competent officer.) 1. This petition has been filed to transfer the investigation of Crime No.18 of 2016 dated 26.01.2016 on the file of the Tiruppachethi Police Station from the 3rd Respondent to the 2nd Respondent or any other competent officer. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State. 3. Taking into consideration the nature of allegations in the FIR and the fact that the case is of the year 2016, this is not a fit case to transfer the investigation prematurely. However, the 1st respondent is directed to monitor the investigation in Crime No.18 of 2016 and the respondent police shall expedite the investigation and expeditiously file a final report. 4. With the above obs...
P. Nagarajan Vs. P. Vijayaragavan
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-06-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the learned Fast Track Court No. I (Magisterial Level), Madurai to expedite the trial in S.T.C.No. 239 of 2014 on the file of the learned Fast Track Court No. I (Magisterial Level), Madurai District.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the learned Fast Track Court No. I (Magisterial Level), Madurai to expedite the trial in S.T.C.No. 239 of 2014 on the file of the learned Fast Track Court No. I (Magisterial Level), Madurai District. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State. 3. Taking into consideration the nature of allegations, the learned Fast Track Court No. I (Magisterial Level), Madurai is directed to complete the trial of the case in S.T.C.No.239 of 2014 within a period of five months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of....
M. Senthil Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-06-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner in the guise of enquiry on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner's maternal Aunt Mrs. Theivanai.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner in the guise of enquiry on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner's maternal Aunt Mrs.Theivanai. 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 given by one Theivanai, a case in Crime No.210 of 2016 has been registered against this petitioner. 3. Under such circumstances, once a regular FIR has been registered, the question of 'not to harass' will not arise, because the expression 'harassment' is so subjective that it cannot be encapsulated in an objective criteria. If a 'not to harass order is passed in this case, where a regular...
R. Venkateswaran Vs. M. Latha and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-06-2016
(Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and executable order dated 04.12.2014, made in I.A.No.422 of 2013 in H.M.O.P.No.130 of 2010, on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Tiruchirappalli.) This memorandum of Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the fair and executable order dated 04.12.2014, made in I.A.No.422 of 2013 in H.M.O.P.No.130 of 2010, on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Tiruchirappalli. 2. The petitioner is the respondent/husband in H.M.O.P.No.130 of 2010 and the first respondent/wife is the plaintiff in the said petition. The first respondent filed H.M.O.P.No.130 of 2010 for restitution of conjugal rights and also filed an application in I.A.No.422 of 2013, for interim maintenance of Rs.30,000/- per month for herself and for the minor daughter, second respondent. According to the first respondent, the petitioner is working as a Scientist C in Defence Research and Development Organizatio...
Karthi @ Karthik @ Karthiksamy Vs. State, rep. by the Inspector of Pol ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-06-2016
(Prayer: Criminal appeal preferred under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., against the judgment dated 28.2.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Erode, in S.C.No.146 of 2011.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in Sessions Case No.146 of 2011, on the file of the II Additional Sessions Judge, Erode. He stood charged for the offence under Sections 302 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. By judgment dated 28.2.2013, the trial Court convicted him under both charges and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. Challenging the said conviction and sentences, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the...
Palaniyappan Vs. State Represented by The Superintendent of Police, Di ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-06-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to provide police protection to the petitioner for putting up constructions in S.No.1090/4 in Patta No.896 in Baganatham Village, Gundampatti, Vedasanthur Taluk, Dindigul District.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to provide police protection to the petitioner for putting up constructions in S.No.1090/4 in Patta No.896 in Baganatham Village, Gundampatti, Vedasanthur Taluk, Dindigul District. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that he has a Civil Court decree in his favour, despite which, the opposite parties are not permitting him to put up a construction in his property, which is going to expire on 31.01.2017. In this regard, the petitioner has lodged a complaint, which is under enquiry in CSR No.79 of 2016 by the responde...
Marirajan Vs. State Represented by, The Inspector of Police, Prohibiti ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-06-2016
(Prayer in Crl.O.P.(MD) 5645/2016: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to transfer the case in C.C.No.145 of 2014 from the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Virudhunagar to any other competent court in Thoothukudi District for conducting trial within the time stipulated by this Honourable Court. Prayer in Crl.O.P.(MD) 5646/2016: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to transfer the case in C.C. No. 196 of 2015 from the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Arupukottai to any other competent court in Thoothukudi District for conducting trial and pronouncing judgement within the time stipulated by this Honourable Court and pass such further or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Prayer in Crl.O.P.(MD) 5647/2016: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to transfer the case in C.C. No. 286 of 2015 pending on the file o...
Nathu K. Patel Vs. State Rep. by The Commissioner of Police, Trichy an ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-06-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondents and their officials not to harass the petitioner and his family members unnecessarily against law under the guise of enquiry.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the respondents and their officials not to harass the petitioner and his family members unnecessarily against law under the guise of enquiry. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State and perused the materials placed on record. 3. It is represented by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) that, on the complaint given by one Mohammed Hanifa, Paulraj and Periasamy against this petitioner, petition enquiries are pending. 4. The petitioner is directed to participate in the enquiry and during enquiry, he shall not be harassed. During the course of enquiry, if any cognizable offence is made out, the respondent police is free to register an FIR and ...
Platinum Textiles Ltd. Vs. The Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-06-2016
(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 letter made in SE/RMD/DFC/HT/AS/F Dkt/D.No.1046/12 dated 30.03.2012 issued by the third respondent and quash the same as 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 letter made in SE/RMD/DFC/HT/AS/F Dkt/D.No.1046/12 dated 30.03.2012 issued by the third respondent and quash the same. 2.Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted a memo stating as follows:- MEMO "In the aforesaid writ petition the petitioner is seeking to quash the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent. The 2nd respondent has issued circular dated 12.03.2012 stating that "OA consumer shall install meeting system with ABT meter and associated CT/PT as per CEA regulations." Based upon the circular the 2...