Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J
B.Murugeshan – Appellant
Versus
K.Prabhu – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arguments about the nature of the complaint and alleged delay. (Para 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 2. the necessity of establishing fraudulent intent for criminal charges under ipc. (Para 10 , 14 , 15) |
| 3. the court's observations on civil versus criminal proceedings. (Para 11 , 19) |
ORDER
Preface:
This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the order dated 25.07.2022 passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti, in Crl.M.P. No.1141 of 2022 in C.C. No.33 of 2020, whereby the learned Magistrate allowed the petition filed under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 , by the respondent/accused and discharged him from the offences punishable under Sections 294 (b), 406, and 420 IPC .
2. The de-facto complainant, being aggrieved by the said order of discharge, has invoked the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C., 1973, contending that the impugned order is illegal, perverse, and contrary to the materials available on record.
3. Gist of the impugned order in the discharge petition:
3.1. The case of the prosecution, as projected in the final report, is that the accused had entered into an agreement with the de facto complainant on 2
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
