This Court dismissed a Crl. O.P. filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to challenge an order refusing judicial remand. The Court upheld the lower court's finding that the case involved documents requiring notice under Section 41 A Cr.P.C. rather than custodial interrogation.
The impugned order refusing remand is sustained and the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 16.03.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
Crl.O.P.No.1489 of 2021
R.Vasanthi, S/o.Rajamanickam .. Petitioner/Defacto Complainant
Vs
Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to set aside the order of rejection of remand passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Nagapattinam dated 19.12.2020 in Crime No.9/2020 pending on the file of Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Nagapattinam.
For Petitioner :Mr.P.Muthamizhselvakumar
For Respondents:Mr.M.Mohammed Riyaz
Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 Mr.N.R.Elango, senior counsel for M/s.Raj Thilak for R2
This petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Court below refusing to remand the second respondent to judicial custody after he was arrested and produced before the court below by the respondent police.
3.This Court has carefully gone through the order passed by the court below refusing the remand of the second respondent. The court below has properly applied its mind and has also taken into consideration the guidelines issued by this court and the court below was perfectly right in insisting for issuance of notice under Section 41 A of Cr.P.C. to the second respondent. This is a case which is borne out by documents and therefore, the court below was of the opinion that this case will not require custodial interrogation of the second respondent. This Court does not find any irregularity or infirmity in the order passed by the Court below.
4.In the result, the order passed by the court below is sustained and this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
kal
To
1. The Judicial Magistrate Court No.I,
Nagapattinam
2. The Inspector of Police,
District Crime Branch,
Nagapattinam District
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
Crl.O.P.No.1489 of 2021
PL(CO)
KM(21/04/2021)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned order refusing remand of the second respondent to judicial custody is sustainable in view of the application of Section 41 A Cr.P.C.?
2 provisions across 1 enactments
R. Vasanthi
State by The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Nagapattinam District
A. Thomas Alwa Edison
N. Anand Venkatesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
