Dismissed

M/S. Best and Crompton v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC8 Oct 2020CRL OP/15975/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Court dismissed the petition as withdrawn by petitioner, granting liberty to approach after further investigation concludes.

What did the court decide?

dismissed the Criminal Original Petition as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Court after the further investigation is over.

M/S. Best and Crompton Vs the Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 08.10.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE P.N. PRAKASH

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.15975 of 2020 and Crl.M.P.No.6113 of 2020

¶6

M/s. Best & Crompton Engineering Projects Ltd. Through its Authorised Representative Shri B.Narayanaswamy No.19A, Emerald Apartments, Flat No.4, First Floor Wheatcrofts Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600034. ...Petitioner Vs.

¶7

1.The Inspector of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation, Bank Securities & Fraud Cell, 36, Bellary Road, Ganga Nagar, Bangalore – 560032.

¶8

2.Central Bank of India Corporate Finance Branch, Through R.Sundara Raman (Asst. General Manager) Addison Buildings, 803, Annasalai, Chennai – 02. ...Respondents

¶9

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to call for the records and quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.3449 of 2018 pending on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, in exercise of the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.N.R.Ilango Senior Counsel for M/s. Ojas Law Firm

¶11

For Respondents : Mr.K.Srinivasan Special Public Prosecutor

¶12

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

¶13

ORDER

¶14

When the matter was taken up for hearing, Mr.K.Srinivasan, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents, represented that further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. is being conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) pursuant to the directions issued by the Trial Court and it is yet to be completed. In view of the same, when this was brought to the notice of the learned counsel for the petitioner, he sought permission to withdraw this petition with liberty to approach this Court after the further investigation is over.

¶15

Accepting the submissions, this Criminal Original

¶16

Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to the petitioner to work out their remedy in the manner known to law. Connected criminal miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/-

¶17

Assistant Registrar

¶18

//True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

¶19

sni To 1.The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai. 2.The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai 3.The Inspector of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation, Bank Securities & Fraud Cell, 36, Bellary Road, Ganga Nagar, Bangalore – 560032. 4.Mr.R.Sundara Raman Assistant General Manager Central Bank of India, Corporate Finance Branch, Addison Buildings, 803, Annasalai, Chennai – 02.

¶20

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

¶21

5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai – 600104.

¶22

+1cc to Mr.Ojas Law Firm, Advocate, SR.No.33642

¶23

Crl.O.P.No.15975 of 2020

¶24

PP(CO)
RN(22/10/2020)

¶25

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

M/S. Best and Crompton v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Best and Crompton v. the Inspector of Police

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

Honestraj Vs the Executive Magistrate Cum

Gayathri Vs Iyyanathan

Gayathri Vs S.Thameem Ansari

Shahul Hameed Vs State Rep.by

Senthilkumar Vs State, Represented by

Parvathy Ramakrishnan Vs the Inspector of Police