Disposed

Santhosh @ Tentin Sathesh v. The II Class Executive Magistrate cum The Thasildhar

Madras HC27 Feb 2023CRL OP(MD)/3003/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a summons for summons issued under Cr.P.C. Section 111 lacking bond details. Court directed fresh summons with particulars and appearance, disposing of the petition for a history sheeter.

What did the court decide?

First respondent to issue afresh summons giving necessary particulars; petitioner to appear; First respondent to proceed in accordance with law.

Santhosh @ Tentin Sathesh Vs The II Class… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3003 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 27.02.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

¶6

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3003 of 2023 and Crl.M.P.(MD)Nos.2746 and 2747 of 2023

¶7

Santhosh @ Tentin Sathesh ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The II Class Executive Magistrate cum The Thasildhar, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.

¶10

2.The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Nainarkoil Police Station, Ramanathapuram District. ... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records pertaining to M.C.No.112 of 2022 dated 01.04.2022 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Vishnuram

¶13

For Respondents : Mr.R.Sivakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶14

1/4

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3003 of 2023

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking orders to call for the records pertaining to M.C.No.112 of 2022 dated 01.04.2022 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the

¶20

learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents.

¶21

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the first respondent has issued summon under Section 111 of Code of Criminal Procedure directing the petitioner to appear before them on 08.04.2022 at 12.00 noon. He would further submit that in the summon the amount of bond to be taken was not mentioned.

¶22

4. As rightly pointed out by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), since the petitioner is a history sheeter and by giving necessary particulars, the impugned summons has been issued and the points now raised by the petitioner can very well be canvassed before the

¶23

2/4

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3003 of 2023

¶26

first respondent.

¶27

5. Recording the submissions on either sides, the first respondent is directed to issue afresh summons giving necessary particulars and on such issuance of summons, the petitioner is directed to appear before the first respondent and thereafter, the first respondent is directed to proceed in accordance with law.

¶28

6. With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition stands

¶29

disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶30

27.02.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No das

¶31

K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

3/4

¶34

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3003 of 2023

¶35

das

¶36

¶37

1.The II Class Executive Magistrate cum The Thasildhar, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.

¶38

2.The Inspector of Police, Nainarkoil Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

¶39

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶40

Order made in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3003 of 2023 and Crl.M.P.(MD)Nos.2746 and 2747 of 2023

¶41

Dated: 27.02.2023

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶43

4/4

Santhosh @ Tentin Sathesh v. The II Class Executive Magistrate cum The Thasildhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santhosh @ Tentin Sathesh v. The II Class Executive Magistrate cum The Thasildhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.Vivek Vs The Inspector of Police

Suresh Vs The Inspector of Police

Ponmanikandan @ Doni Vs The Deputy Superintendent of Police

K.Nagarajan Vs The Inspector of Police

Vivid Solaire Energy Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Superintendent of Police

Kesavakumar Vs The Circle Administrative Magistrate Cum Revenue Divisional Officer