SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 93435

MADRAS HIGH COURT
Honourable Mr Justice P. VELMURUGAN
P.RAJASEKARAN – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE, REPRESENTED BY – Respondent


Crl.M.P.No.1113 of 2023

Crl.M.P.No.1113 of 2023

in

Crl.A.No.383 of 2020

P.VELMURUGAN,J.

When the main appeal came up before this Court on 06.01.2023, the

learned counsel for the appellant sought permission of this Court to peruse the

records. Therefore, this Court called for records and permitted the counsel for

the appellant to peruse the records and instructed him to argue the matter on the

next hearing.

2. Today (25.01.2023) when the matter came up before this Court,

instead of arguing the appeal, the counsel for the appellant/accused has filed

the present petition and would submit that the Form 91 was not marked before

the trial Court during trial. He would further submit that already approval was

granted by the CMDA and the appellant/accused was nothing to do with the

work to be done by the defacto complainant. Therefore, in order to secure the

ends of justice, the appellant/accused himself wanted to be examined as

defence side witness under Section 315 Cr.P.C. Hence, the appellant/accused

may be permitted to examine as defence witness and his evidence may be

treated as additional evidence. He also referred Section 391 Cr.P.C.

3. Heard the lea

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top