Ramasamy v. Murugan
Case brief
What is this about?
The Madras High Court quashed the second private complaint filed by the respondent alleging assault and intimidation, holding it not maintainable as it arose from the same cause of action as an earlier case closed as a mistake of fact.
What did the court decide?
The Criminal Original Petition is allowed; the proceedings in S.T.C.No.6016 of 2014 are quashed and the Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
What the court decided
Crl.O.P.(MD).No.23621 of 2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 07.12.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.23621 of 2014 and M.P(MD).No.1 of 2014
- Ramasamy
- Sakunthala
- Dhanapalan
- Annamalai
- Jeyapandian ... Petitioners Vs. Murugan ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to call for the records relating to the Charge sheet in S.T.C.No. 6016 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Sivagangai and quash the same.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a second complaint filed on the same cause of action after a prior complaint was closed as a mistake of fact is maintainable under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Whether the continuation of proceedings in the second complaint constitutes an abuse of the process of law.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Ramasamy
- petitioner
Sakunthala
- petitioner
Dhanapalan
- petitioner
Annamalai
- petitioner
Jeyapandian
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court