Dismissed

S. Sambasivam @ Raja Sthapathy v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC21 Jan 2020CRL OP(MD)/1480/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed a Criminal Original Petition seeking to quash trial proceedings concerning dowry, cheating, and criminal breach of trust. The Court held factual contentions require a regular trial and denied relief, though personal appearance of petitioners was dispensed with.

What did the court decide?

The criminal original petition was dismissed. Personal appearance of petitioners was dispensed with.

S. Sambasivam @ Raja Sthapathy Vs the Inspector of Police — Dowry and Cruelty | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

Crl.O.P(MD)No.1480 of 2016

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 21.01.2020 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Crl.O.P(MD)No.1480 of 2016 and Crl.M.P.(MD)Nos.776 and 777 of 2016

¶3

1.S.Sambasivam @ Raja Sthapathy 2.Shanmuga Sundaram 3.S.Palaniammal

¶4

... Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 3 Vs.

¶5

1.State rep by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Pudukkottai,Pudukkottai District. (Crime No.5 of 2014) ... Respondent / Complainant

¶6

2.G.Kavitha ... Respondent/Defacto Complainant

¶7

Prayer : This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records from the lower Court to quash all the further proceedings in C.C.No.60 of 2015 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Pudukkottai and quash the same concerning the petitioners.

¶8

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Udhaya Kumar For Respondents : Mr.A.Robinson Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) for R1 Mr.J.Anandkumar for R2

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

The petitioners are facing trial in C.C.No.60 of 2015 on the file of Judicial Magistrate, Pudukkottai for the offences under Sections 498(A), 406 and 506(i) of I.P.C., and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶11

2.The second respondent is the defacto complainant. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners reiterated the contentions set out in the memorandum of grounds. It is seen that they are rather factual in nature. Therefore, the petitioners will have to necessarily establish their innocence only in a regular trial. The contentions raised by the petitioners' counsel are not sufficient for invoking the inherent powers of this Court to quash the impugned proceedings. Therefore, leaving open all the contentions and defences of the petitioners, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. However, taking note of the over all facts and circumstances of the case, the personal appearance of the petitioners is dispensed with. Of course the petitioners have to be represented by their counsel when they are absent. The petitioners https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶12

1/2

¶13

Crl.O.P(MD)No.1480 of 2016

¶14

also have to appear when their presence is absolutely necessary and imperative. The Trial Magistrate will endeavour to conclude the trial on merits and in accordance with law within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶15

Sd/-

¶16

Assistant Registrar (Crl.side)

¶17

// True Copy //

¶18

/ /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶19

ias To

¶20

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Pudukkottai.

¶21

2.The Inspector of Police,

¶22

All Women Police Station,

¶23

Pudukkottai,

¶24

Pudukkottai District.

¶25

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

¶26

+1 CC to M/s.J.ANANDKUMAR, Advocate ( SR-2252[F] dated 21/01/2020 )

¶27

Crl.O.P(MD)No.1480 of 2016 21.01.2020

¶28

SMA/26/02/2020/2P/5C

¶29

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

¶30

2/2

S. Sambasivam @ Raja Sthapathy v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. Sambasivam @ Raja Sthapathy 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramathal@Nagammal(Died) Vs Nanjammal@Chinnathambi

Pattappa Gounder Vs Valliammal

Kathunbi Vs K.a.Subham

Anandayee Ammal Vs Arjuna Gramani

Chandra and 3 Others Vs T Natarajan and 5 Others

S.P.Balasubrmania Chettiar Vs Sairam