M.NIRMAL KUMAR
D. Santhanam – Appellant
Versus
State Represented by the Inspector of Police, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records and quash the case in Crime No.07 of 2021 on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same.)
1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.07 of 2021, pending on the file of the 1st respondent Police.
2. The 2nd respondent lodged a complaint against the petitioners before the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Sriperumbudur. On receipt of the same, the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Sriperumbudur, by order, dated 25.09.2020 in Crl.M.P.No.1121 of 2020 forwarded the complaint under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C., to the 1st respondent Police and directed to register a case if cognizable offence is made out. On receipt of the same, the 1st respondent Police registered a case in Crime No.07 of 2021 against the petitioners for offence under Sections 376(2)(n), 417, 420, 506(ii) and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act, 2002.
3. The gist of the case is that the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant is an Advocate (Enrolment No.2361 of 2015) by profession and is practising in
Sakiri Vasu Versus State of Uttar Pradesh reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409
Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar Versus State of Maharashtra reported in 2019 AIR (SC) 327
Pramod Suryabhan Pawar Versus State of Maharashtra reported in 2019 AIR (SC) 4010
Lalita Kumari Versus State of Uttar Pradesh reported in 2013 (4) MLJ(Cri) 579
Udav Versus State of Karnataka reported in (2003) 4 SCC 46
Chitra Versus Ravikumar & Another reported in 2002 (4) CTC 683
Rashmi Kumar Versus Mahesh Kumar Bhada reported in 1997(2) SCC 397
State of Uttar Pradesh Versus O.P.Sharma reported in 1996 (7) SCC 705
Satvinder Kaur Versus State (Government of N.C.T of Delhi) reported in (1999) 8 SCC 728
State of Punjab Versus Gurumit Singh reported in (1996) 2 SCC 384
Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar Versus State of Maharashtra reported in 2019 AIR (SC) 327
Pramod Suryabhan Pawar Versus the State of Maharashtra reported in 2019 AIR (SC) 4010
State of Karnataka Versus L.Muniswamy and others reported in (1977) 2 SCC 699
State of Karnataka Versus M.Devendrappa and another reported in (2002) 3 SCC 89
None of the cases explicitly indicate that they have been overruled, reversed, or treated as bad law based solely on the language provided. There are no phrases such as "overruled," "reversed," "criticized," or "abrogated" in the descriptions. Therefore, no case law in this list can be definitively categorized as bad law based on the information provided.
[Followed / Affirmed / Validated]
None explicitly indicated. The descriptions generally state legal principles or points of law without referencing subsequent validation or affirmation.
[Distinguished / Clarified]
<00100041432>: Clarifies the scope of an aggrieved person's rights regarding investigation agencies under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. This appears to be a statement of legal principle rather than a case that has been distinguished or clarified in subsequent judgments.
[Rejected / Criticized / Questioned]
None explicitly mention criticism or questioning of the legal principles established in these cases.
[Confirmed / Consistent Treatment]
<00100006596>: Emphasizes that courts should not exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings where factual matrix clearly shows offences. This indicates a consistent approach to the use of Section 482 for quashing proceedings, but no indication of subsequent treatment.
[Legal Principles / Precedents]
<00100000092>: Discusses the reasonableness of evidence appreciation by trial courts and the legality of acquittals. It states that appreciation of evidence by the trial court is unreasonable and perverse, which suggests a strong stance but does not indicate subsequent overruling.
<00100062637>: Explains the scope of Section 482 Cr.P.C. regarding appreciation of evidence and the distinction between rape and consensual sex, indicating a clear legal principle without indication of subsequent treatment.
<02100047851>: Establishes the importance of proving false promise of marriage with relevant evidence, including DNA tests, as a central legal point. No indication of subsequent treatment.
<00100000288>: States the law regarding licensing and prosecution under specific orders, presenting a legal position without subsequent treatment indication.
<00100063881>: Discusses the scope of Section 482 Cr.P.C. and distinctions in breach of promise cases, presenting a legal principle without subsequent treatment.
<00100053419>: States the mandatory nature of FIR registration under Section 154 Cr.P.C. and does not indicate subsequent treatment.
<00100004070>: Clarifies that material collected during investigation cannot be judicially scrutinized at that stage for jurisdiction, stating a legal principle without subsequent treatment.
All cases are presented with their legal points but lack references to subsequent judicial treatment such as being overruled or criticized. Since the list does not specify subsequent judicial treatment or references to later cases, the treatment status remains uncertain for all cases. Without additional context or citations, it is impossible to determine whether any of these cases have been overruled or criticized in later judgments.
**Source :** Sakiri Vasu VS State of U. P. and others - Supreme Court State Of Punjab VS Gurmitsingh - Supreme Court Uday VS State of Karnataka - Supreme Court State of Karnataka VS M. Devendrappa - Supreme Court State of Karnataka VS L. Muniswamy - Supreme Court DHRUVARAM MURLIDHAR SONAR VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - Supreme Court Rashmi Kumar VS Mahesh Kumar Bhada - Supreme Court Chitra VS Ravikumar - Madras State Of U. P. VS O. P. Sharma - Supreme Court Pramod Suryabhan Pawar VS State of Maharashtra - Supreme Court Lalita Kumari VS Govt. of U. P. - Supreme Court Satvinder Kaur VS State (N. C. T. ) Of Delhi - Supreme Court
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.