Petitioners sought dispensation from personal appearance before the trial court in a pending criminal case. The court allowed it conditionally, requiring appearance at initial questioning, Section 313 proceedings, judgment and directed hearings, with an affidavit undertaking for counsel representation.
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.
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 30-01-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR
CRL MP(MD) NO. 13933 of 2024 IN CRL OP(MD) NO. 22354 OF 2024
M.Kaivalyam S/o.Late L.Mariappan, No.3/435, Vadivel Nagar, Andankoil Keezhpagam Village, LNS Post, Manmangalam Taluk, Karur District and two others ... Petitioners Vs
K.Vanathi D/o.Late M.Kabilar, Old No.3/364, New Door No.3/394, Vadivel Nagar, Andankoil Keezhpagam Village, LNS Post, Manmangalam Taluk, Karur District. ... Respondent
1/3
For Petitioners : Mr. V.Balaji, Advocate
ORDER
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the personal appearance of the petitioners in Crl.M.P. No.1530 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Karur is ordered to be dispensed with, on condition that they shall appear at the time of initial questioning, proceedings under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., and at the time of passing judgment and on the hearings, specifically directed by the trial court. The petitioners are further directed to give an undertaking in the form of affidavit that they will be duly represented by a counsel on all hearing dates and that the Counsel representing them will cross examine the prosecution witnesses on the same day they are examined in chief. The petitioners shall not dispute the identity of the witnesses. The petitioners shall appear before the Court in the event their presence is insisted by the trial judge for the purpose of identification. If the petitioners adopt any dilatorily tactics, it is open to the Trial Court to insist for their https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis appearance and deal with the petitioners in accordance with the judgment of
2/3
Supreme Court of India, in State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Shambunath Singh, reported in 2001 (4) SCC 667.
Sd/30/01/2025
/ TRUE COPY /
/02/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
aav
TO
+1 CC to M/s.V.BALAJI, Advocate ( SR-1139[I] dated 30/01/2025 )
ORDER IN CRL MP(MD) No.13933 of 2024 Date :30/01/2025 ES/VR/SAR/17.02.2025/3P/4C
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023.
3/3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the personal appearance of the petitioners before the trial court can be dispensed with on stated conditions?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Shambunath SinghReferred
2001 (4) SCC 667 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M. Kaivalyam
K. Vanathi
M. Nirmal Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
