Dismissed

K.Sellamuthu v. a.Ponnusamy

Madras HC27 Jun 2022CRL OP/23776/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a Criminal Original Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to set aside an order dismissing his request for documents. The High Court dismissed the petition as infructuous because the underlying criminal complaint was dismissed following an amicable settlement.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Original Petition dismissed as infructuous; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

K.Sellamuthu Vs a.Ponnusamy — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 27.06.2022

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.23776 of 2021 and Crl.M.P.Nos.13092 & 13093 of 2021

¶6

K.Sellamuthu

¶7

...Petitioner/Accused

¶8

Vs.

¶9

A.Ponnusamy ...Respondent/Defacto Complainant

¶10

Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition had been filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to set aside the order dated 21.10.2021 passed by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Edappadi in C.M.P.No.1535 of 2021 in C.C.No.98 of 2020.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Parthiban

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.M.Senthilkumar

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This Criminal Original Petition had been filed to set aside the order dated 21.10.2021 passed by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Edappadi in C.M.P.No.1535 of 2021 in C.C.No.98 of 2020.

¶15

It is the case of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner/Accused that the petitioner had filed a Petition in C.M.P.No.1535 of 2020 in C.C.No.98 of 2020 under Section 65(B) of the Indian Evidence Act, seeking to furnish records relating to discussion between the Petitioner herein and the Respondent. After due enquiry the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Edappadi had dismissed the Petition. Aggrieved by the same, the Accused had approached this Court by filing this Petition invoking the powers of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

¶16

When the case came up for hearing on earlier occasion (i.e, on 13.06.2022) both side parties took time to settle the matter amicably. Therefore, this Court had repeatedly granted

¶17

adjournment.

¶18

4.Today (i.e, 27.06.2022), when the case came up for hearing the learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the complaint in C.C.No.98 of 2020 was dismissed by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Edappadi stating that the parties had arrived at amicable settlement and as per settlement in Lok Adalat dated 12.03.2022, the Respondent/ complainant had received Rs.10,000/- from the Petitioner/Accused and the balance amount to be paid within a period of three months with that direction the complaint had dismissed. Therefore, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner had submitted that this Petition had became infructuous since the C.C.No.90 of 2020 itself was dismissed by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Edappadi. He had furnished the status report uploaded on the website of the Court as proof.

¶19

Based on the submissions of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed as infructuous. Consequently, connected miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶20

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS-IX)

¶21

//True Copy//

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

tri

¶24

¶25

The Judicial District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Edappadi

¶26

+1cc to M/s.M.Senthilkumar, Advocate, S.R.No.40554

¶27

Crl.O.P.No.23776 of 2021 and Crl.M.P.Nos.13092 & 13093 of 2021

¶28

PMK(CO) RGA(15/07/2022)

K.Sellamuthu v. a.Ponnusamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Sellamuthu v. a.Ponnusamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Pongali Vs State Rep. by

M.Sadiqua Arman Vs the Superintendent of Police

Rajaganesh Vs N.Mullai

K.Kamatchi Vs Inspector General of Police

J.Gokula Krishnan Vs the State of Tamilnadu Rep by

Chinnathambi Vs the State Rep by Its