Quashed

M/S.South India Road Milk v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC27 Jun 2017CRL OP/8192/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a criminal petition filed to quash proceedings in C.C.No.1 of 2016 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Villupuram. The State conceded that there was no objection to quashing. The court quashed the proceedings as against the petitioner and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C.No.1 of 2016 quashed insofar as they relate to the petitioner. Crl.O.P. disposed of. Connected M.P.s closed.

M/S.South India Road Milk Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 27.06.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.8192 of 2017 and Crl.M.P.Nos.5902 and 6391 of 2017

¶6

M/s.South India Road Milk Transport, a Sole Proprietary concern,

¶7

rep.by its Proprietor, Mr.N.Vaidhiyanathan, having its place of business at No.76, 12^th Avenue, Ashok Nagar, Chennai-600 083. [ Petitioner ]

¶8

¶9

The State of Tamil Nadu, through its

¶10

The Additional Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, C.I.D., Villupuram Range, Villupuram.

¶11

[Respondent]

¶12

Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the proceedings in C.C.No.1 of 2016 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate at Villupuram and to quash the same as illegal and without jurisdiction in so far as it relates to the petitioner herein.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.E.Vijay

¶14

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1 of 2016 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate at Villupuram, as illegal and without jurisdiction in so far as it relates to the petitioner herein.

¶15

2.When this Criminal Original Petition was taken up, it was submitted on behalf of the State that the respondent has no

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

objection to quash the complaint against the petitioners herein, since the fourth accused has already been brought on record.

¶18

3.In view of the above statement made, the proceedings in C.C.No.1 of 2016 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Villupuram is quashed in so far as the petitioners herein are concerned, and the Criminal Original Petition is disposed of accordingly. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶19

Sd/-

¶20

Assistant Registrar(CS IV)

¶21

//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
KM
To
1.The Additional Superintendent of Police,
Crime Branch, C.I.D.,
Villupuram Range,
Villupuram.
2.The Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Villupuram.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court,
Chennai-600 104.
+10ccs to Mr.E.Vijay, Advocate Sr.44492 [05/07/2017]

¶22

Crl.O.P.No.8192 of 2017 and Crl.M.P.Nos.5902 and 6391 of 2017

¶23

srg 04/07/2017

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M/S.South India Road Milk v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.South India Road Milk v. the State of Tamil Nadu

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

Mohammed Latheef M/58 Yrs, Vs Reshma F/20 Yrs

R.Lakshmi, A/60YRS, Vs State Rep by

Alexdicknickolespanneerselvam, Vs State by

Kuppusamy Gounder, M/a 65 Yrs, Vs the State Rep by Its

Suresh Elangovan Vs S.Muruga Bharti

Iqbal M/a 69 Years, Vs Nasrin Fathima F/a 21 Years