The High Court dismissed the criminal original petition filed under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. for seeking leave to appeal, as the petitioner failed to appear for consecutive hearings after repeated adjournments sought by counsel.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.02.2015
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA
Crl.O.P.No.32353 of 2014 in Crl.A.Sr.No.55257 of 2014
S.Eswaramoorthy ... Petitioner
Vs.
V.S.Krishnamoorthy ... Respondent
Prayer:- Petition has been filed under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. to grant leave to file an appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 27.08.2014 made in S.T.C.No.333 of 2012 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate (Fast Track Court No.I) Erode.
For Petitioner : No appearance
O R D E R
Whenever the matter was taken up, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought for adjournments for the past several hearings. When the matter was taken up for hearing on 04.02.2015, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner and hence, it was adjourned today under the caption ''for dismissal''. Even today, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Therefore, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed for non prosecution.
Sd/Assistant Registrar //True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
kj
To
2.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Chennai.
Crl.O.P.No.32353 of 2014 in Crl.A.Sr.No.55257 of 2014
scd(co) pmk.21.2.2015
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal original petition seeking leave to appeal can be heard in the absence of the petitioner's counsel?
S. Esaramoorthy
V. S. Krishnamoorthy
R. Mala
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
