Dismissed

C.Kasthuri v. Mr.Rajendran

Madras HC4 Jan 2017CONT P/3105/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This contempt petition alleged non-compliance of an order by the police regarding a property dispute enquiry. The Court observed that the police had reopened the enquiry and closed the specific criminal spacing report petition after recording statements. The court noted these actions had been performed and allowed the petition to be closed with no penalty. While the court technically granted relie

What did the court decide?

No penalty imposed; the order to police stating that the dispute had been investigated and closed was observed as compliance with the earlier order.

C.Kasthuri Vs Mr.Rajendran — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 04.01.2017

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.N. PRAKASH

¶6

Cont. Petition No.3105 of 2016

¶7

C. Kasthuri Petitioner
vs.
Mr. Rajendran
Inspector of Police
P-5 Police Station (Crimes)
MKB Nagar
Respondent
Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 seeking to punish the
respondent for wilful disobedience of the order dated
16.08.2016 passed in Crl.O.P. No.17055 of 2016.
For petitioner Mr. L. Sriram
For respondent Mr. V. Jayaprakash Narayanan
Special Government Pleader
ORDER

¶8

This contempt petition is filed alleging non compliance of the order dated 16.08.2016 passed in Crl.O.P. No.17055 of 2016.

¶9

2 Today, Mr. P. Rajendran, Inspector of Police, P-5

¶10

MKB Nagar Police Station (alleged contemner) is present.

¶11

3 Pursuant to the order dated 16.08.2016 passed by

¶12

this Court in Crl.O.P. No.17055 of 2016, the Inspector of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶13

Police has reopened the enquiry in CSR No.196 of 2016 and

¶14

has gone to the house of the petitioner and has conducted

¶15

¶16

enquiry. During enquiry, it transpired that the dispute is between the petitioner and her advocate-son with regard to certain properties that are standing in the name of the petitioner. The respondent police have recorded the statement of the petitioner and her son Mohan, advocate and have thereafter, closed the petition enquiry in CSR No.196

¶17

of 2016 on 07.10.2016. A copy of the closure report is

¶18

furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner across the Bar.

¶19

In view of the above, this contempt petition is
closed.
SD/-
JOINT REGISTRAR(OS)(i/c)
cad
//Certified to be true copy//

¶20

Dated at Madras this the day of 2017.

¶21

COURT OFFICER(O.S.)

¶22

from 25^th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing Certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format. SM/CO/21/09/2017

¶23

¶24

The Inspector of Police P-5 Police Station (Crimes) MKB Nagar

¶25

one cc to the Govt.Pleader, High Court,SR.No.19/17 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

C.Kasthuri v. Mr.Rajendran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Kasthuri v. Mr.Rajendran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sree Annapoorna Vs Union of India

Pulavar Patchaimuthu, Vs Mr.Periaswamy

M.Duraisamy and 3 Others Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

P.Kuppan, Vs the Special Officer

S. Palanisamy Vs the Land Commsnr, O/O Land

Tamilarasi Vs Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep