Santhakumari vs State of Tamil Nadu - 2023 Supreme(SC) 1796

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(SC) 1796

HRISHIKESH ROY, MANOJ MISRA
Santhakumari – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. K. Lenin Devasahaya Vinober, Mr. U. Priyadarsini, Mr. D. Percivul Pericles, Mr. Scv Vimal Pani, Mr. A. Lakshminaryanan, AOR.
For the Respondents: Mr. M.P. Parthiban, AOR, Mr. R. Sudhakaran, Ms. Shalini Mishra, Mr. G.R. Vikash, Mr. Bilal Manoor, Mr. K. Devivendran, Mr. D. Alagendren, Mr. Vishal Tiwari, Dr. Joseph Aristole S., Ms. Vaidehi Rastogi.

Table of Content
1. appeal against high court's order (Para 2)
2. right of accused to be heard (Para 3 , 5)
3. precedent supporting hearing rights (Para 4 , 7)
4. violation of procedural rights (Para 6)
5. appeal allowed; remanded for fresh decision (Para 8)

ORDER :

2. This appeal is against the order dated 18.11.2022 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal Revision Case No.1436 of 2022 whereby the revision of the complainant against an order of the learned Magistrate dismissing his application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "the Code") has been allowed and a direction has been issued to register First Information Report against the appellants.

4. In support of the above contention, the appellants have placed reliance on a three-judge Bench decision of this Court in Manharbhai Muljibhai Kapadia & Another v. Shaileshbhai Mohanbhai Patel & Others, 2012(10) SCC 517, wherein in paragraph 48, in the context of a revision against an order dismissing a complaint under Section 203 of the Code, the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 401 of the Code were interpreted as under:

5. The learned counsel for the respondents does not disput

Click Here to Read the rest of this document