BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
V.Jeyabharathi – Appellant
Versus
Inspector of Police – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. property settlement and historical claims. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. impact of societal power dynamics. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 3. defense against allegations of abetment. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. continuing obstruction of legal proceedings. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. justice for the victimized advocate. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
ORDER :
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
Crl.O.P(MD).No.4189 of 2024 is filed by A4 and Crl.O.P. (MD).No.4192 of 2024 is filed by A3, A5, A6 and A7 to quash S.C.No. 47 of 2024 on the file of the learned Additional Subordinate Court, Thanjavur in so far as the petitioners are concerned.
2.Since both petitions filed to quash the proceedings in S.C.No.47 of 2024 and the grounds raised are identical, a common order is passed.
3.The brief facts of the case is that one Veerapillai of Athalur Village, Peravoorani Taluk owned lands and he had no issues, hence he settled his properties in favour of his sister sons Chinnayapillai, Rengasamy Pillai, Marimuthu Pillai and Iyyakannu Pillai. Totally there are 42 properties which were settled to the above persons by Document No.41 of 1925. Chinnayapillai and Rengasamypillai settled with Pattukottai properties, Marimu
Ramesh Kumar vs. State of Chattisgarh
Ranganayaki vs. State by Inspector of Police
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Kanha alias Omprakash
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Kalyan Singh and others
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and others
Chhanga alias Manoj vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Jage Ram and others vs. State of Haryana
State of Rajasthan vs. Shambhu Kewat and another
Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Deepak and others
Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another
Gulab Das and others vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Kashiram and others
Ishwar Singh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Saleem alias Chamaru and another
The absence of accused at the scene does not exonerate them from charges of abetment if evidence indicates participation in planning or instigating the crime.
High Court can quash non-compoundable offence proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. if parties settle dispute amicably and no public interest involved.
The lack of essential elements for original charges of deceit and forgery leads to a conviction modification under lesser charges.
The court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C to quash criminal proceedings if they amount to an abuse of the process of the court or if quashing the proceedings would serve ....
The court held that a complaint alleging offenses under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 must....
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.