Partly allowed

Usharani, Aged 62 Years, v. State by

Madras HC19 Feb 2019CRL OP/27296/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the Criminal Original Petition only regarding the third petitioner, Usharani, finding no specific allegations against her. It dismissed the petition against the first and second petitioners and directed the Trial Court to complete the trial within six months.

What did the court decide?

Crl.O.P. allowed against third petitioner only; trial to be completed within six months; connected M.P.s closed.

Usharani, Aged 62 Years, Vs State by — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 19.02.2019

¶3

Coram

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.27296 of 2016
and
Crl.M.P.No.13876 & of 2016
and
Crl.M.P.No.1508 & of 2019
1. Usharani
2. Deenadayalan
3. Sudha ... Petitioner / Accused
Vs.
1. State by
The Inspector of Police,
W33 All Women Police Station,
Madhavaram, Chennai.
(Cr.No.02 of 2016) ... Respondent / Complainant
2. J.Sujatha ... Respondent / Defacto Complainant
[2nd respondent is impleaded as per
order of this Court dated 03.03.2017
in Crl.M.P.No.3230 of 2017]
Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records
in C.C.No.228 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate, Thiruvotrivur, Chennai - 19 and quash the same.

¶6

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prakasam For R1 : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor For R2 : No Appearance ORDER

¶7

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records in C.C.No.228 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvotrivur, Chennai - 19 and quash the same.

¶8

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

¶9

It is seen from the statement of the second respondent/defacto complainant recorded under Section 161 C.R.P.C that there is no specific allegations as against the third petitioner and the allegations are only against the first and second petitioner. Therefore, this Court is inclined to quash the Criminal proceedings as against the third petitioner alone, and insofar as the first and second petitioner are concerned, this petition is dismissed.

¶10

Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed only in respect of third petitioner. Considering the case of the year 2016, the Trial Court is directed to complete the trail within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶11

Sd/--
Assistant Registrar(CS)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
raja
To

¶12

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvotriyur, Chennai.

¶13

2.The Inspector of Police Udayarpalayam Police Station

¶14

Ariyalur District.

¶15

(in Crime No.359 of 2018)

¶16

The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.

¶17

+1cc to Mr.R.Balasubramanian , Advocate SR.No. 16108 +1cc to Mr. C.Prakasam, Advocate SR.No. 15375(22/04/2019)

¶18

Crl.O.P.No.27296 of 2016 and Crl.M.P.No.13876 & of 2016 and Crl.M.P.No.1508 & of 2019

¶19

A.SK(14/03/2019)

¶20

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

Usharani, Aged 62 Years, v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Usharani, Aged 62 Years, v. State by

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

S.Vimal Sekar@Vimala Sekar Vs the Inspector of Police

Govindarasu Vs State Rep.by

V.S.J.Dinakaran Vs the State Rep. by

N.Thenmozhi Vs the State Rep by Its

R.Brintha Vs P.Duwarakesh

S.Kasthuri Vs the Superintendent of Police