Disposed

Jayaraman v. the Protection Officer

Madras HC24 Jan 2020CRL OP/23243/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., directed the Trial Court to expedite the domestic violence matter. The Court dispensed with the petitioners' appearance except for receiving copies and future procedural stages as necessary.

What did the court decide?

Trial expedited; petitioners' appearance dispensed with except for receiving copies and future procedural stages.

Jayaraman Vs the Protection Officer — Domestic Violence | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 24.01.2020

¶2

CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶4

Crl.O.P.No.23243 of 2013
and MP.No.1 of 2013
and Crl.M.P.No.10862 of 2017
1.Jayaraman
2.Thangam
3.Kalyani
4.Ramasamy

¶5

...Petitioners
vs.
...Respondents

¶6

1.The Protection Officer,
(Domestic Violence Act, 2005),
O/o.District Social Welfare Office,
Ariyalur, Ariyalur District.
2.Kavitha

¶7

Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to call for the records in DVMC No.17 of 2013 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ariyalur, pending trial and quash the same.

¶8

For Petitioners : Mr.N.Nanmaran
For Respondents : Mr.C.Ayyapparaj,
Additional Public Prosecutor
for R1
Mrs.M.Prema for R2

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

This criminal original petition has been filed seeking to call for the records in DVMC No.17 of 2013 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ariyalur and quash the same.

¶11

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that without going into the merits of the case, it would suffice, if this Court issues direction to the Trial Court to expedite the trial and complete the same as early as possible. He would further submit that the appearance of the petitioners before the Trial Court may be dispensed with and would further

¶12

1/4

¶13

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

¶14

submit that the petitioners are ready to appear as and when necessary arise.

¶15

3.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents conceded to the request made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.

¶16

4.In view of the above, this Court directs the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ariyalur, to expedite the trial in DVMC No.17 of 2013 and complete the same as early as possible. The appearance of the petitioners before the Trial Court is dispensed with. However, this order will not stand on the way of the Trial Court to insist for the appearance of the petitioners for receiving copies under Section 207 of Cr.P.C., framing of charges, questioning under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and judgment and as and when the Trial Court feels it necessary.

¶17

With the above directions, this criminal original petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶18

Sd/Asst.Registrar (CJ conf) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar mbi To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Ariyalur. 2.-do-Thro The Chief Judicial Magistrate Ariyalur 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104. +1 cc to Mr.N.Nanmaran Advocate sr6647 Crl.O.P.No.23243 of 2013 and MP.No.1 of 2013 and Crl.M.P.No.10862 of 2017

¶19

aa26/02/2020

¶20

2/4

¶21

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

Jayaraman v. the Protection Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayaraman v. the Protection Officer

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

K.Amutha Priya Vs Susheela Kumar

M.Premsakthi Vs State by

P.R.Sriram Vs the Inspector of Factories

T.Al.Tenappan Vs State Represented by

Gopinath Vs State Rep by

Ilayaraja @ Ilayarasan Vs Nagarajan