Lenin v. State by
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Judicature at Madras interfered with a final report in a criminal case. The charge under Section 3 of the Prevention of Premywania Act was quashed due to lack of material, while proceedings for other offences were allowed to continue with fresh charges.
What did the court decide?
The final report is interfered with insofar as the charge under Section 3 of PPD Act is concerned and quashed.
What the court decided
Crl.O.P.No.3539 of 2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.03.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
Crl.O.P No.3539 of 2021
and Crl MP No.2076 of 2021
Lenin .. Petitioner
Vs.
1. State Rep. By
The Inspector of Police,
Kalasapakkam,
Thiruvannamalai
2. Thanjiammal .. Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in PRC No.1 of 2021 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kalasapakkam, Thiruvannamalai District.
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Mahendra Naidu For Respondent : Mr.Mohammed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor
Crl.O.P.No.3539 of 2021
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the final report could be quashed insofar as the charge under Section 3 of PPD Act is concerned due to lack of material.
Whether the Court below should proceed further against the accused for offences other than the quashed charge.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Lenin
- respondent
State Rep. By The Inspector of Police, Kalasapakkam, Thiruvannamalai
- respondent
Thanjiammal
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court