Partly allowed

S.Jeyavelu v. the State by

Madras HC21 Oct 2019CRL RC/1115/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a criminal revision under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. to call for records and set aside an order. The petitioner withdrew the revision but prayed for a direction to the Trial Court to complete the trial within one month. The court dismissed the revision as not pressed and directed the Trial Court to complete the trial and pass orders within one month.

What did the court decide?

Revision dismissed as not pressed; Trial Court directed to complete trial within one month.

S.Jeyavelu Vs the State by — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated 21.10.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶5

Crl.R.C.No.1115 of 2019

¶6

S.Jeyavelu .. Petitioner/Accused

¶7

¶8

1.State represented by The Inspector of Police (Crime), F1, Chindadripet Police Station, Chindradripet, Chennai. .. 1^st Respondent/Complainant

¶9

2.The Assistant Executive Engineer, The Then Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Now TANGEDCO, Chindadripet, Chennai 600 002. .. 2^nd Respondent/De-facto Complainant

¶10

Prayer:- This Criminal Revision has been filed, under Section 397 read with 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the common order dated 20.02.2019 in Crl.M.P.No.2718/2018 in C.C.No.18403/2004, by the learned XIV Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai and set aside the same and consequently, discharge the revision petitioner/accused from above proceding.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Chandrasekaran

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, APP

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he is not pressing this criminal revision however, he would pray that a direction may be issued to the Trial Court to complete the trial and pass orders within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶15

2 In view of the submissions and the endorsement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Criminal Revision Petition stands dismissed as not pressed and the Trial Court is directed to complete the trial and pass orders within a

¶16

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

¶17

¶18

period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

¶19

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
ssi
To:
1.The XIV Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai.
2.The Inspector of Police (Crime),
F1, Chindadripet Police Station,
Chindradripet, Chennai.
3.The Assistant Executive Engineer,
The Then Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Now TANGEDCO, Chindadripet, Chennai.
4. The Public Prosecutor, Chennai.
Crl.R.C.No.1115 of 2019
VBA(CO)
CB(27/11/2019)

¶20

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

¶21

S.Jeyavelu v. the State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Jeyavelu v. the 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

Sivasakthi Kanna Vs Minor G.S.Subhasri

G.Velmurugan Vs State Rep. by the

A.Mandhiramoorthy Vs State Rep.by

Infi Galaxy Marketing India P. Ltd., Vs Kantilal

L.Srinivasan Vs Jensi Rani

S.Ramesh Babu Vs N.S.Win Traders Rep by Its Partner Shanmugam Ch