IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.Nirmal Kumar, J
K.Poopathy – Appellant
Versus
The State – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner induced payments for job promises. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. defacto complainant's credibility questioned. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. trial court directed to expedite proceedings. (Para 10 , 11) |
ORDER
The petitioner/accused in C.C.No.15526 of 2022 pending on the file of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai facing trial for the offence under Section 420 IPC filed a discharge petition in Crl.M.P.No.17638 of 2023, dismissed by the Trial Court by order dated 14.10.2024. Against which, the present revision petition filed.
2.The gist of the case is that the defacto complainant, a Senior Technician in Hindustan Petroleum retired from service during November 2016 was searching job for his son S.Sathyaprakash, who completed his Diploma in Mechanical engineering and completed a course in Shipping and Logistics. During a train journey, the defacto complainant came in contact with the petitioner/accused who introduced himself as Personal Assistant to the Chief Engineer, Chennai Port Trust and lured the defacto complainant by representing that the Chief Engineer is having wide powers to appoint a person in Chennai Port Trust to the Post of Assistant Tra

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.