Allowed

Rabeesa Begam v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC20 Feb 2019CRL MP(MD)/313/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition concerning a compensation order, the Court accepted a request from the accused's counsel to reduce the monthly payment imposed on the petitioner from Rs. 15,000 to Rs. 10,000 upon fulfillment of arrears conditions.

What did the court decide?

Monthly payment condition reduced from Rs. 15,000 to Rs. 10,000; arrears to be cleared in four weeks.

Rabeesa Begam Vs the Inspector of Police — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Wednesday, the Twentieth day of February Two Thousand Nineteen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

CRL MP(MD) No.313 of 2019

¶7

(*) CRL MP(MD) No. 9744 of 2018

¶8

¶9

CRL OP(MD) No.15435 of 2018

¶10

RABEESA BEGAM ... PETITIONER/ PETITIONER/ PETITIONER ACCUSED No.2

¶11

¶12

1.STATE REPRESENTED BY

¶13

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

¶14

ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, KEELAKARAI,. RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT Crime No 9/2018 ` ...1^st RESPONDENT/ 1^st RESPONDENT/ 1^st RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶15

2.JENNATHUL KURSHITHA ...2^nd RESPONDENT/2^nd RESPONDENT/

¶16

2^nd RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶17

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to implead Jennathul Kurshitha as 2nd respondent in Crl.M.P.No.9744/2018 pending before this Honourable Court and thus render justice.

¶18

Prayer in CRL MP(MD). 9744/ 2018 :

¶19

To modify the condition imposed in Crl.OP(MD)No. 15435/2018 dated 05.09.2018 relates to pay Rs. 15,000/- to the defactocomplainant for every month

¶20

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.KATHIRVELU, Senior Counsel for Mr.K.PRABHU, Advocate for the petitioner and of MRS.ANANTHA DEVI, Government Advocate(criminal side) for R1 and MR.N.MOHIDEEN BASHA, Advocate for R2, the court made the following order:-

¶21

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ The learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the accused stated that if the amount earlier fixed is reduced to

¶22

¶23

Rs.10,000/-, they would clear the entire arrears within a period of four weeks.

¶24

2.The said request is accepted. The condition earlier imposed on the said Rabeesa Begam to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month to the defacto complainant, is reduced to Rs.10,000/- per month.

¶25

3.The learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant is called upon to furnish the bank account details of his client for the learned standing counsel for the accused.

¶26

4.Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed.

¶27

sd/-

¶28

20/02/2019 (*)As per order of this Honourable High court order dated 11.03.2019 made in CRL MP(MD) No. 9744 of 2019

¶29

(No further orders are needed)

¶30

/ TRUE COPY /

¶31

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶32

¶33

1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, KEELAKARAI. RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT

¶34

2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶35

+1. C.C. to Mr.K.PRABHU Advocate SR.No.3497 Dt.21.02.2019 +1. C.C. to Mr.K.PRABHU Advocate SR.No.52849 dt.11.03.2019

¶36

ORDER

¶37

IN CRL MP(MD) No.313 of 2019 IN

¶38

CRL OP(MD) No.15435 of 2018 Date :20/02/2019 MSI/VR/SAR 3/19.03.2019/2P-5C

¶39

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

Rabeesa Begam v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rabeesa Begam v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Kalaiselvan, Vs the Joint Registrar of

Mrs.Jp.Kanna Vs the Commissioner

K.Gunasekaran Vs the Joint Registrar of

A.Bose, S/O.Aanga Thevar, Vs the Secretary to Government

M/S.Koya &Company Construction Vs the Chief Engineer

Rajendran, S/O.Subramanian, Vs the Government of India