Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
L.VICTORIA GOWRI
Krishnamurthy – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamilnadu Rep. by the Inspector of Police – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. common factual background of intra-family property dispute linking all three cases (Para 1 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. allegations specific to crl.o.p.(md) no.22939 and role of a2 (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. prosecution case in crl.o.p.(md) no.770 regarding alleged restraint and abduction (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. prosecution case in crl.o.p.(md) no.771 regarding removal of machinery and assault allegation (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 5. petitioners' arguments for quashment based on civil nature and lack of ingredients (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 6. respondents' arguments against quashing - prima facie case and limitation of jurisdiction (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45) |
| 7. legal principles governing section 528 bnss jurisdiction and relevant precedents (Para 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52) |
| 8. analysis of petitioner/a2 role; omnibus allegation insufficient to justify trial (Para 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71) |
| 9. case and counter case analysis; issues factually contested, quash not appropriate (Para 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81) |
| 10. d |
Inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS to quash proceedings must be exercised sparingly; omnibus allegations without specific overt acts against a peripheral accused who is a mere employee just....
Criminal proceedings arising from property disputes, where allegations are vague and omnibus, constitute an abuse of process of law and should be quashed when the essential ingredients of the alleged....
Criminal proceedings arising from a genuine civil property dispute, which lack the essential statutory ingredients for the alleged penal offences and are invoked merely to exert pressure, are liable ....
Police protection for property possession denied absent executable decree; FIR alleging forcible entry and damage not quashed despite civil dispute background, as specific criminal acts require inves....
Unexplained delay in lodging an FIR, combined with evidence of malafide intentions, can justify quashing of criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of the legal process.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the exercise of power under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C to prevent abuse of process of the Court and miscarriage of justice.
Point of Law : Offence of Cheating - Inherit Powers of High Court - Extraordinary and inherent power of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., do not tilt in favour of the petitioners to pass an or....
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
