Jayavel v. State by
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court allowed a criminal revision holding that the acceptance of a final report omitting FIR accused without notice to the de facto complainant was illegal under settled Supreme Court law, setting aside lower court orders and remitting the matter for notice issuance.
What did the court decide?
Impugned orders accepting final report and committal were set aside; matter remitted to Magistrate to issue notice; records dispatched to Magistrate.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON : 27.07.2021
PRONOUNCED ON : 25.08.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
CRL.R.C.NO.1002 OF 2015
AND
M.P.NO.1 OF 2015
Jayavel
... Petitioner/De-facto Complainant
Vs.
The State represented by,
The Inspector of Police,
Arani Taluk Police Station,
Thiruvannamalai District,
(Crime No. 308 of 2014)
... Respondent/Complainant
Prayer: This Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Section
397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C., against the order passed
by the learned Principal Sessions and District Judge,
Thiruvannamalai District, in Crl.M.P.No.2780 of 2015, dated
24.08.2015 in S.C.No.69 of 2015.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order of taking cognizance and committal proceedings are vitiated for want of notice to the petitioner before accepting the final report.
Whether the prosecution was legally entitled to rely on a final report that omitted names listed in the First Information Report without giving notice to the complainant.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Jayavel
- respondent
The State
Coram
RMT. Teekaa Raman
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court