P.Kumaran v. Kalianna Gounder
Case brief
What is this about?
In this criminal revision, the High Court set aside an order directing police registration of a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. because the complaint lacked a mandatory affidavit as per Supreme Court precedent. The court granted liberty to the respondent to file a fresh complaint.
What did the court decide?
The order dated 21.1.2015 in C.M.P.No.213 of 2015 is set aside with liberty to the first respondent to file a fresh complaint along with an affidavit.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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 : 29.7.2015
Coram
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B. RAJENDRAN
Criminal Revision Petition No. 107 of 2015
and
MP.No.1 of 2015
Indira Gandhi .. Petitioner
Versus
- Sumathy
- State rep.by Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mamallapuram, Kancheepuram District
.. Respondents
Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 21.1.2015 made in C.M.P.No.213 of 2015 on the file of the learned District Munsifcum - Judicial Magistrate, Thirukazhikundram.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order directing police registration of a complaint without an accompanying affidavit can be set aside in light of Supreme Court precedent.
Whether the period of pendency of the revision should be excluded from the limitation period for filing a fresh complaint.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Indira Gandhi
- respondent
Sumathy
- respondent
State rep.by Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mamallapuram, Kancheepuram District
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court