The High Court of Judicature at Madras dismissed a criminal appeal for non-prosecution. The parties failed to appear despite prior notices of dismissal; having no representation, the court exercised the option to dismiss the appeal. No specific statutes or precedents were applied.
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.
Crl.A.No.792 of 2015
IN THE HIGH Court OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.11.2023
CORAM:
The Honourable MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
Crl.A.No.792 of 2015
A.Rajagopal ...Appellant / Complainant -Vs-
Velusamy Gounder ...Respondent / Accused
Prayer:- Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the judgment dated 15.06.2015 made in S.T.C.No,2253 of 2012 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.I, Pollachi.
For Appellant : No appearance For Respondent : No appearance
J U D G M E N T
When the case came up for hearing on earlier occasion on
09.11.2023, there was no representation for both the parties. Hence, this Court had directed the Registry to list the matter under the caption ''For Dismissal'' on 16.11.2023.
1/3
Crl.A.No.792 of 2015
Dismissal'', there is no representation for both the parties.
left with no other option except to dismiss the Appeal for non prosecution.
non-prosecution .
16.11.2023
shl
To
2/3
Crl.A.No.792 of 2015
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J.,
shl
Crl.A.No.792 of 2015
16.11.2023
3/3
A.Rajagopal
Velusamy Gounder
Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
