Dismissed

Senthil Kumar v. The State Represented by

Madras HC1 Jul 2024CRL RC/34/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the criminal revision filed to set aside an order refusing to dispense with the appearance of the petitioner. The Court directed that the petitioner must appear before the trial court for specific procedural steps but need not appear for other purposes.

What did the court decide?

Directed that the petitioner's appearance before the trial court be dispensed with except for receiving copies under Section 207, examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C., and judgment pronouncement. Cri

Senthil Kumar Vs The State Represented by — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.R.C.No.34 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 01.07.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

Crl.R.C.No.34 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.Nos.278 and 279 of 2024

¶7

Senthil Kumar S/o.Chandrahasan ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs. The State, Represented by the Inspector of Police, K-3, Aminjikarai Police Station, Chennai - 600 029. ... Respondent

¶9

PRAYER : Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of the code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to set aside the order dated 13.12.2023 made in Crl.M.P.No.16494 of 2023 in S.C.No.293 of 2022 on the file of the learned XXI Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Vivekananthan For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

This criminal revision case has been filed to set aside the order

¶13

dated 13.12.2023 made in Crl.M.P.No.16494 of 2023 in S.C.No.293 of

¶14

2022 on the file of the learned XXI Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai.

¶15

Page 1 of 4

¶16

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

¶17

Crl.R.C.No.34 of 2024

¶18

The petitioner has filed a petition u/s 227 of Cr.P.C. seeking to discharge him from the charges levelled against him in S.C.No.293 of 2022 before the learned XXI Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai which was dismissed by the trial Court vide impugned order, dated 13.12.2023. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed the present revision.

¶19

Though very many grounds have been raised by the petitioner against the order impugned, however, when the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would contest the case before the trial Court and this Court, without going into the merits of the case may dispense with the appearance of the petitioner before the trial court.

¶20

Though such a prayer has been sought for, however, it is to be pointed out that the presence of the petitioner cannot be dispensed with in toto. In such view of the matter, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs that the appearance of the petitioner before the trial court is

¶21

_________ Page 2 of 4

¶22

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

¶23

Crl.R.C.No.34 of 2024

¶24

dispensed with except for his appearance for the purpose of receiving copies u/s.207 and questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and on the day on which judgment is to be pronounced. However, if for any particular reason, the presence of the petitioner is necessary, the trial court, at its wisdom, shall direct his appearance on those days.

¶25

Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶26

01.07.2024

¶27

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No

¶28

vji

¶29

¶30

1. The learned XXI Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai.

¶31

2. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

¶32

_________ Page 3 of 4

¶33

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

¶34

Crl.R.C.No.34 of 2024

¶35

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

¶36

vji

¶37

Crl.R.C.No.34 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.Nos.278 and 279 of 2024

¶38

01.07.2024

¶39

_________ Page 4 of 4

¶40

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

Senthil Kumar v. The State Represented by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Senthil Kumar v. The State Represented 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

R.Ravinder Kumar Vs Lalith Jain

M.Alagiri Vs Thiru.R.Ponmudi

M.RamKumar Vs Dr.Sidh Kumar

Arun Kumar Vs N.S.E.Baskar

S.Pradeep Vs Minor. Keerthanya Pradeep

G.Rajamani Vs R.Elanchezhiyan