Wednesday, 20, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

James vs The State Rep. By
2022 Latest Caselaw 17188 Mad

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 17188 Mad
Judgement Date : 2 November, 2022

Madras High Court
James vs The State Rep. By on 2 November, 2022
                                                                Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.16602 & 8732 of 2017

                       BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                   DATED: 02.11.2022

                                                       CORAM:

                           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

                                        CRL.O.P.(MD)Nos.16602 & 8732 of 2017

                                                         and

                                  CRL.M.P.(MD)Nos.5915, 5916, 10975 & 10976 of 2017


                     1.James
                     2.K.Sathyamoorthy
                                               ...Petitioners in CRL.O.P.(MD)No.16602 of 2017




                     P.Krishnamoorthy           ...Petitioner in CRL.O.P.(MD)No.8732 of 2017


                                                          Vs.

                     1.The State rep. by
                        The Inspector of Police,
                        C.S.C.I.D. Police,
                        Madurai,
                        Madurai District.
                        (In Crime No.153 of 2015)

                     1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                     Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.16602 & 8732 of 2017



                     2.S.Iyyappan
                        Regional Manager,
                        Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation,
                        Madurai Region,
                        Kuruvikaran Salai,
                        Madurai - 20.                             ... Respondents in both Crl.O.Ps.


                     COMMON PRAYER : Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section

                     482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the charge sheet in

                     C.C.No.44 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.III, Madurai

                     and quash the same as against the petitioners as illegal.



                                  For Petitioners in

                                        CRL.O.P.(MD)No.16602 of 2017 : Mr.S.M.A.Jinnah

                                  For Petitioner in

                                        CRL.O.P.(MD)No.8732 of 2017: Mr.S.Saravanakumar

                                  For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthikumar, - for R1

                                                        Government Advocate (Crl. side)

                                                       : Mr.H.Arumugam - R2

                                                            (in both Crl.O.Ps.)

                     2/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                               Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.16602 & 8732 of 2017



                                               COMMON ORDER


                                  These petitions have been filed challenging the proceedings

                     in C.C.No.44 of 2016, pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate

                     No.III, Madurai.



                                  2. The grounds raised by the counsel for the petitioners are

                     all factual in nature and it requires appreciation of evidence and this

                     Court cannot decide the same in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section

                     482 of Criminal Procedure Code. It is left open to the petitioners to raise

                     all the grounds before the Court below and the same shall be considered

                     on its own merits and in accordance with law. This Court is not inclined

                     to interfere with the proceedings pending before the Court below.



                                  3. The learned counsel for the petitioners requested this

                     Court to dispense with the presence of the petitioners and permit them to

                     be represented through a counsel before the Court below.




                     3/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                               Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.16602 & 8732 of 2017




                                  4. Considering the said submission and taking into

                     consideration, the facts and circumstances of the case, the presence of the

                     petitioners is dispensed with and they shall be represented by a counsel,

                     who shall cross examine the witnesses on the same day or on the next

                     hearing date, after they are examined in Chief. The petitioners shall not

                     dispute the identity of the witnesses. The petitioners shall be present

                     before the Court below as and when directed by the Court below and

                     shall be present at the time of questioning under Section 313(1)(b) Cr.P.C

                     and at the time of passing of the final judgment.



                                  5. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed

                     of with a direction to the Court below to complete the proceedings in

                     C.C.No.44 of 2016 within a period of six months from the date of receipt

                     of a copy of this order. The trial shall be conducted on a day to day basis

                     in accordance with the guidelines given by Hon'ble Supreme Court

                     reported in Vinod Kumar Vs State of Punjab [2015 (1) MLJ (Crl) 288

                     SC]. If the petitioners adopt any dilatory tactics, it is open to the trial

                     Court to insist upon the presence of the petitioners and remand them

                     4/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                            Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.16602 & 8732 of 2017

                     to custody as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in STATE

                     OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. SHAMBHU NATH SINGH (JT 2001 (4)

                     SC 3191).    Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also

                     closed.




                                                                      02.11.2022
                     Index: Yes/No
                     Internet: Yes/No
                     rm




                     5/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                               Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.16602 & 8732 of 2017

                     To


                     1.The Judicial Magistrate No.III,
                        Madurai.


                     2. The Inspector of Police,
                        C.S.C.I.D. Police,
                        Madurai,
                        Madurai District.


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




                     6/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                           Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.16602 & 8732 of 2017

                                            N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

rm

CRL.O.P.(MD)Nos.16602 & 8732 of 2017

02.11.2022

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

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter