Allowed

K.Samiyappan v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC3 Sept 2020CRL OP/9477/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Criminal Original Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court directed the trial court at Tiruppur to expedite the completion of trial in C.C.No.1103 of 2017. The Court directed that non-cooperating accused be remanded in custody per Supreme Court precedent and noted the option to register a fresh FIR under Section 229-A IPC if an accused absconds.

What did the court decide?

Directions were issued to the Judicial Magistrate Court No.IV, Tiruppur, to expeditiously complete the trial in C.C.No.1103 of 2017; accused may be remanded in custody if they do not cooperate; a fres

K.Samiyappan Vs the Inspector of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 03.09.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

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

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.9477 of 2018

¶6

K.Samiyappan .. Petitioner
Vs.
State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
Central Crime Branch,
Tiruppur District.
(Crime No.24 of 2016) .. Respondent

¶7

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to direct the trial Court viz., Judicial Magistrate Court No.IV, Tiruppur, to expedite the trial in C.C.No.1103 of 2017 and complete the same within a time frame stipulated by this Court.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Pradeep Raj For Respondent : Mrs.P.Kritika Kamal Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶9

This case is taken up through video conferencing.

¶10

This criminal original petition is filed seeking to direct the trial Court viz., Judicial Magistrate Court No.IV, Tiruppur, to expedite the trial in C.C.No.1103 of 2017 and complete the same within a time frame stipulated by this Court.

¶11

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

¶12

When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was examined as PW1 in C.C.No.1103 of 2017, but, unfortunately, he died subsequently.

¶13

Mrs.P.Kritika Kamal, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the trial in C.C.No.1103 of 2017 has begun with examination of two witnesses and on account of COVID-19 pandemic situation, the trial Court is not able to make any progress in the case.

¶14

In view of the above, the trial Court is directed to expeditiously complete the trial in C.C.No.1103 of 2017. If the accused does not co-operate with the trial, they can be remanded in custody, in the light of the law laid down in the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Shambhu Nath Singh¹ . If the accused absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

¶15

In the result, this criminal original petition is allowed.

¶16

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS II)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
nsd
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate No.IV,
Tiruppur.

¶17

Do thro the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruppur. 3.The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Tiruppur District. 4.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai – 600 104.

¶18

Crl.O.P.No.9477 of 2018

¶19

A.SK(06/11/2020)

¶20

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

¶21

K.Samiyappan v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Samiyappan v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manikandan Vs State Rep. by

Selvi Vs State Rep.by

Jestinraj Vs State Rep.by Its

Dy Commandant (Legal) Vs State Rep. by

P.Kathiresan Aged 52 Yrs Vs Inspector of Police

K.Saminathan, Aged 60 Years, Vs State Rep. by