The contempt petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of the Courts Act to punish the respondent for allegedly disobeying a previous order was summarized and closed as the Government Advocate submitted that a case was registered based on the petitioner's complaint.
Contempt petition stood summarized and closed.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 16.08.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH
Cont.P.No.1365 of 2019
P.Deenadayalan ... Petitioner Vs. Mr.A.K.Viswanathan, The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Vepery, Chennai - 600007. ... Respondent PRAYER: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of the Courts Act praying to punish the respondent herein under the Contempt of Court Act for deliberately disobeying order dated 14.11.2017 passed in Crl.O.P.No.29072 of 2017
For Petitioner : Mr.S.V.S.Ilamvazhuthi
For Respondent : Mr.B.Arulmozhi Maran Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER Heard Mr.S.V.S.Ilamvazhuthi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.B.Arulmozhi Maran, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent.
2
consideration, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) on instructions, submitted that based on the petitioner's complaint dated 31.10.2017, a case has been registered in FIR.No.214 of 2019.
Smi/29/08/2019
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the contempt petition should be summarized.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
P. Deenadayalan
The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Vepery, Chennai
M.S. Ramesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
