Criminal revision petition dismissed as default since the petitioner failed to appear or file any representation on two separate occasions when the matter was called by the High Court bench.
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: 18.12.2018
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN
Crl.R.C.No.26 of 2017
J.Rathnabai ... Petitioner /Accused
Vs
C.K.Natarajan ... Respondent/Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 r/w
401 of Criminal Procedure Code, against the order 08.12.2016 in
C.A.No.57 of 2015 on the file of 1 st Additional District and
Session Judge at Tiruppur, confirming the Judgment dated
06.05.2015 in C.C.No.79 of 2013 on the file of Judicial
Magistrate Court (Fast Track Court) at Tiruppur.
For Petitioner : No Appearance
For Respondent : Mr. S.Udhayakumar
O R D E R
When the matter was called on 14.12.2018, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Therefore, this Court has posted the matter under the caption “For dismissal” on 18.12.2018. But, even today when the matter is called, there is no representation for the petitioner.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
gsk
To
Crl.R.C.No.26 of 2017
SR(CO)
GN(23/01/2019)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
J.Rathnabai
C.K.Natarajan
V.Parthiban
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
