Disposed

T.D.Naidu v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Madras HC7 Feb 2020CRL OP/5603/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an F.I.R., the Trial Court investigation was completed with a charge sheet filed. The petitioner requested trial expediting and dispensation from regular appearances. The court dispensed with general appearances but ordered the Trial Court to complete the trial within three months.

What did the court decide?

Order directed the Trial Court to complete the trial within three months. Appearance of the petitioner before the Trial Court is dispensed with.

T.D.Naidu Vs the Sub Inspector of Police — Madras HC (2020) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 07.02.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.5603 of 2014 and Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2014

¶6

T.D.Naidu ... Petitioner/Accused No.1

¶7

Vs.
1.State Rep by,
Sub Inspector of Police,
D-3 K.K.Chathiram Police Station,
Thiruvallur District. ..Respondent/Complainant
(Crime No.169 of 2013)
2.Boominathan .. Respondent/Defacto Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C., to call for all the records in Crime No.169 of 2013
on the file of the respondent and quash the same.
For Petitioner : M/s.A.Saravanan for
M/s.S.Ashok Kumar
For R1 : M/s.C.Iyyappa Raj
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER

¶8

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the F.I.R in Crime No.169 of 2013 pending on the file of the 1^st respondent Police.

¶9

2.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the first respondent police has completed the investigation in Crime No.169 of 2013 and also filed a charge sheet before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruttani and the same is taken on file as C.C.No.79 of 2018.

¶10

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that 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 submit that the petitioner is to appear as and when necessary arise.

¶11

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

¶12

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor concedes to the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶13

5.In view of the above, this Court directs the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tiruttani to expedite the trial in C.C.No.79 of 2018 and complete the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The appearance of the petitioner 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 petitioner 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.

¶14

6.With the above directions, this Criminal Original
Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-III)
//True copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
vv2
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate,
Tiruttani.
2.The Sub Inspector of Police,
D-3 K.K.Chathiram Police Station,
Thiruvallur District.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
Copy To
The Section Officer,
Criminal Section,
High Court, Madras
Crl.O.P.No.5603 of 2014
SSV(CO)
GMY(22/09/2020)

¶15

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

T.D.Naidu v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.D.Naidu v. the Sub Inspector of Police

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

E.Muniyappan Vs K.v.Raja, Aged 52 Years

Kmm Freight Systems Vs J.Michael Manoharan

Elamaran Alias John Elamaran Vs State Rep by

T.D.Naidu Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

T.D.Naidu Vs the Inspector of Police

A.Rashid Vs the State Rep.by