Disposed

S.Arumugam v. the Assistant Commissioner of

Madras HC24 Jul 2020CRL A(MD)/362/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal, the appellant's counsel informed the court that the appellant, who was the defacto complainant, had passed away before hearing. The legal heirs expressed no interest in prosecuting the appeal further. Consequently, the court closed the appeal without deciding the merits of the case below.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was closed without a substantive decision.

S.Arumugam Vs the Assistant Commissioner of — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

Crl.A.(MD).No.362 of 2015

¶2

S.Arumugam

¶3

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.07.2020

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI Crl.A.(MD).No.362 of 2015

¶6

S.Arumugam .. Appellant/P.W.5/Defacto Complainant Vs.

¶7

1.The Assistant Commissioner of Police (L&O),

¶8

Office of the Commissioner of Police,

¶9

Palayamkottai Sub Division, Perumal Puram Police Station, Tirunelveli District. (Crime No.324 of 2007)

¶10

.. Respondent/Complainant

¶11

2.V.Narayanan

¶12

.. Respondent/Sole Accused

¶13

PRAYER: Criminal Appeal, filed under Section 372 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records pertaining to the Judgment in S.C.No.14 of 2008, dated 26.05.2015 on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Court, Tirunelveli in Crime No.324 of 2007 on the file of the respondent No.1 and set aside the same.

¶14

For Appellant : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy

¶15

For Respondents : Mr.A.Robinson, for R1 Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This Criminal Appeal has been filed as against the Judgment passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli in S.C.No.14 of 2008, dated 26.05.2015.

¶18

2.When the matter is taken up today, Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy, learned counsel for the appellant submits that this appeal is arising out the order of acquittal passed by the trial Court. Pending this appeal, the appellant/defacto complainant passed away. According to him, he also verified with the legal heirs of the appellant, but they are not interested in prosecuting the appeal further. To that effect, the learned counsel for the appellant undertakes to file a memo to the Registry.

¶19

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

¶20

1/2

¶21

Crl.A.(MD).No.362 of 2015

¶22

3.Recording the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant, this appeal is closed.

¶23

Assistant Registrar (RECORDS)

¶24

// True Copy //

¶25

¶26

Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶27

¶28

1.The II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli.

¶29

2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police (L&O), Office of the Commissioner of Police, Palayamkottai Sub Division, Perumal Puram Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

¶30

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶31

Copy to

¶32

The Section Officer, Criminal Section-2 copies Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶33

Crl.A.(MD).No.362 of 2015 24.07.2020

¶34

KM (14.09.2020) 2P 6C

¶35

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

¶36

2/2

S.Arumugam v. the Assistant Commissioner of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Arumugam v. the Assistant Commissioner of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.Mani, Vs Jayabalan

M.Sakthivel, Vs S.Gunajeyanthi

Kanaga Mary John Vs Tamilselvi

D.Siluvai Venance Vs The Inspector of Police

Sudalaikumar Vs the Inspector of Police

Wesly Lazar Vs the Insepector of Police