Disposed¶24

Ashok Kumar v. the State Rep.by

Madras HC22 Apr 2025CRL OP/18964/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Crl.O.P.No.18964 of 2024; Crl.MP.No.11206 of 2024; Ashok Kumar v. State (Inspector of Police, E-2 Royapettah Police Station, Chennai) and C.Shree Vidhya; Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure quash petition; C.C.No.1192 of 2024; XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Saidapet, Chennai; condonation of absence before trial court; travel ban / visit to India banned by High Commission of India, Kuala Lumpur (Consular Section), order dated 24.06.2019; complaint by second respondent alleging threats to her and her son; 'for being mentioned' listing; G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, J.; decision date 02.07.2025.

What did the court decide?

Clarification that the petitioner may file a necessary petition before the trial court to condone his absence; trial court directed to dispose of such petition in accordance with law. ¶24

Ashok Kumar Vs the State Rep.by — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Crl.OP.No.18964 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 02 . 07.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.18964 of 2024 and Crl.MP.No.11206 of 2024

¶7

Ashok Kumar ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1. The State Represented by The Inspector of Police, E-2, Royapettah Police Station, Chennai.

¶10

2.C.Shree Vidhya ... Respondents.

¶11

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in C.C.No.1192 of 2024 on the file of the learned XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Saidapet, Chennai and quash the same.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Chandrasekar For Respondents : Mr.R.Vinoth Raja Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 : Mr.M.R.Jyothimanian for Mr.E.V.Chandru @ E.Chandrasekaran for R2

¶13

1/4

¶14

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

¶15

Crl.OP.No.18964 of 2024

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

Today, this criminal original petition has been listed before this Court under the caption 'for being mentioned'.

¶18

2 . The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that while disposing of the aforementioned criminal original petition on 22.04.2025, this Court dispensed with the appearance of the petitioner before the trial court excluding certain occasions when charges are framed, copies are furnished, etc. However, as the petitioner's visit to India was already banned by the order dated 24.06.2019 of the High Commission of India, Kuala Lumpur (Consular Section) on the complaint lodged by the second respondent alleging that the petitioner is threatening her and her son in India, unless the ban is lifted, he will not be able to visit India to comply with the aforesaid order passed by this Court.

¶19

3 . In view of the above submission, it is clarified that the

¶20

2/4

¶21

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

¶22

Crl.OP.No.18964 of 2024

¶23

petitioner is at liberty to file a necessary petition before the trial court

¶24

to condone his absence, pursuant to which the trial court is directed to dispose of the same in accordance with law.