Back
MADRAS HIGH COURT
A. X. Y., J
Manager V.G. Panneerdas and Company v. Nataraja Thevar
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. complaint and summons issued for various ipc offences. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. legality of requiring personal appearance discussed. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. judicial discretion in permitting representation under crpc. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. context of representation by pleader due to practical concerns. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. final order permitting pleader representation. (Para 10) |
1. The petitioners, to whom summons under S 205, CrPC., have been issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pudukkottai, on a complaint instituted by the respondent herein, for offences under S.420, S.409 and S.500, I.P.C., and whose prayer under S.205(1), CrPC., for permission to be represented by a Pleader has been turned down, invoke the inherent powers of this Court for a direction to the court below for the above relief.
2. The Respondent filed a private complaint against the Petitioners for offences under S.420, S.409 and S.500, I.P.C. The complaint was taken on file by the court below for the above offences and, by registered post, summons were sent to the Petitioners for their appearance on 28.4.1987. On that day, the petitioner's counsel appeared in court and tiled an application under S.205(1), CrPC., for dis
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
