Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J
Sivarasan @ Sivaraj S/o Thiru. Marappan – Appellant
Versus
Sub Inspector of Police, Kattoor Police Station – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction details regarding sivarasan's case. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments about the petitioner's awareness of the trial. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. legal implications on trial proceedings and pages of conviction. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. importance of fair trial adherence, section 251 cr.p.c. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. reversal of previous convicting order. (Para 11) |
ORDER :
1. This Criminal Revision Petition has been preferred as against the order dated 12.03.2019 passed in S.T.C.No.3018 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Coimbatore thereby convicting the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 4(1) of the Tamil Nadu Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1959.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 05.03.2019 the petitioner attempted to affix a poster condemning the Government of India for not releasing the convicts involved in former Prime Minister's Assassination case. Therefore, the respondent police registered a FIR against the petitioner in Cr.No.304 of 2019 for the offence punishable under Section 4(1) of the Tamil Nadu Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1959. After completion of investigation the respondent filed a final report and t
The failure to adhere to procedural requirements under Section 251 of the Cr.P.C. renders a conviction invalid, emphasizing the necessity of a fair trial and proper communication of charges to the ac....
The court ruled that additional accused cannot be impleaded without prima facie evidence, emphasizing adherence to prior judicial directions.
The filing of the final report much after the period of limitation rendered the trial court's cognizance of the offense illegal.
Absence of direct allegation or evidence implicating the accused and lack of proper investigation justify quashing criminal proceedings.
Revision maintainable against dismissal of Section 156(3) CrPC application; prior police complaints evidenced by postal receipts satisfy precondition; forgery to obtain scheme benefits discloses cogn....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
