SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(Mad) 1613

T.S.SIVAGNANAM
Senthil Kumar – Appellant
Versus
N. Bharathi Mohan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:V.R. Appaswamee, Advocate.
For the Respondent: R. Vijayakumar for K.G. Senthil Kumar.

Judgment :

1. This petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., is to quash P.R.C.No.136 of 2010, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Tambaram. The said case was taken on file based upon a complaint filed by the respondent herein under Section 200 Cr.P.C. for offences under Section 341, 324, 326 & 307 IPC read with Sections 34 and 109 IPC.

2. The petitioners are the accused 1 to 4 in the said case. According to the petitioners, the second petitioner and the father of the defacto complainant were running a financial company jointly as partners and at the time, the second petitioner was residing with his wife in the first floor of the defacto complainant's house for rent. It is stated that the second petitioner had to leave his native place, as his mother-in-law was ailing and his wife had handed over the gold ornaments to the respondent to keep them in safe custody till they come back. The allegation is that when they returned and asked for the jewells, evasive reply was given. Again a demand was made and it is alleged that the respondent's father made certain allegations. It is further stated that on account of the defamatory words used by the father of the defacto complaina




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top