Disposed

S.Venkatesan v. the State Rep by

Madras HC19 Dec 2024CRL OP/31808/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras, without deciding on the merit of the challenge to the lower court's order dismissing the recall of a prosecution witness, exercised inherent powers to grant the petitioner one last opportunity to recall PW.10 subject to payment of costs on pain of forfeiture.

What did the court decide?

Grants one last opportunity to recall PW.10 on payment of Rs. 5,000/- to Adyar Cancer Institute by 20.12.2024, subject to cost receipt production and timely cross-examination.

S.Venkatesan Vs the State Rep by — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

CRL.O.P.No.31808 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.No.18156 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 19.12.2024

¶4

CORAM : MR. J USTICE N.SESHASAYEE

¶5

CRL.O.P.No.31808 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.No.18156 of 2024

¶6

Venkatesan.S ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The State Rep. by Deputy Superintendent of Police Special Investigation Cell Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Chennai ... Respondent

¶9

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. Act, 2023, to set aside the order passed by the learned Special Court for trial of cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act, Chennai dated 12.12.2024 made in Crl.M.P.No.750 of 2024 in C.C.No.30 of 2011 and allow this Criminal Original Petition.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Karthikeyan

¶11

For Respondents : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶12

1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶13

ORDER

¶14

CRL.O.P.No.31808 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.No.18156 of 2024

¶15

This petition is filed challenging an order passed by the Special Court for V & A.C cases in Crl.M.P.No.750 of 2024 in C.C.No.30 of 2011. The said petition was filed by the petitioner / accused for recalling PW.10, the Trap Laying Officer (T.L.O) after the cross examination of the Investigating Officer. This was dismissed by the trial Court essentially on the ground that the petitioner had been afforded multiple opportunities which he have wasted.

¶16

2.Heard both sides. Without getting into the merit of the submissions on the order passed, in the best interest of justice, this Court grants one last opportunity to the petitioner to recall PW.10, but upon he paying a cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) payable to the Adyar Cancer

¶17

Institute (WIA), West Canal Road, Gandhi Nagar, Adyar, Chennai-600

¶18

020, on or before 20.12.2024.

¶19

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner is required to produce the copy of the payment receipt of cost before the trial Court on 21.12.2024, upon which the trial Court shall fix the date convenient to both the prosecution and the defence for the further cross examination of T.L.O. It is underscored that the petitioner

¶20

2/4

¶21

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

¶22

CRL.O.P.No.31808 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.No.18156 of 2024

¶23

shall complete the cross examination on the date on which the T.L.O. appears, subject to force majeure vis major circumstances. If he does not cross examine the T.L.O on the date fixed by the trial Court, then he will forfeit the opportunity herein accorded to him by this Court.

¶24

4.This petition stands disposed of accordingly. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶25

19.12.2024

¶26

kas Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation

¶27

Note: Issue order copy today

¶28

¶29

1.The Special Court for Trial of Cases under Prevention of Corruption Act Chennai

¶30

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police Special Investigation Cell Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Chennai.

¶31

3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras Chennai 600 104.

¶32

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

¶33

3/4

¶34

CRL.O.P.No.31808 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.No.18156 of 2024

¶35

N.SESHASAYEE, J. kas

¶36

CRL.O.P.No.31808 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.No.18156 of 2024

¶37

19.12.2024

¶38

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

S.Venkatesan v. the State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Venkatesan v. the State Rep by

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

M.G.Thulukkanam Vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Sailesh, M/a 42 Years, Vs the State Rep by Its

S.P.Chandrasekar Vs State Rep by

Saroja Vs the State Rep.by

T.V. Madhavan (Died) Vs R.Saravanan (Deceased)

Vigneshwaran Vs the Director