Madras High Court Annual Digest 2024: Part II [Citation 251 to 492]

REPORTS

Employee Cannot Be Penalised For Appointing Authority's Failure To Follow Communal Rotation Guidelines: Madras High Court

Case Title: R Sasikumar v The State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 251

The Madras High Court recently set aside the order cancelling the appointment of a Jeep Driver who was wrongly appointed to a post earmarked for members from the Scheduled Castes community. (Arunthathiyars on Preferential Basis)

Justice RN Manjula held that the employee had not suppressed any material facts and he could not be penalized or made a scapegoat for the appointing authority's failure to follow the guidelines of communal rotation. Noting that the appointment was cancelled after 14 years, the court added that the Government was a model employer and could not adopt such atrocious practices.

[Preventive Detention] When Liberty Is Involved, Officers Are Expected To Show Sensitivity In Dealing With Representations: Madras High Court

Case Title: Tmt. Sabeena Beevi v The Joint Secretary to Government of India and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 252

The Madras High Court recently observed that detaining authority was expected to show sensitivity while dealing with representations relating to preventive detention. The court added that when there was unexplained delay on the part of the detaining authority in forwarding representations to the sponsoring authority, the least safeguards guaranteed by the constitution were denied to the detenu.

The bench of Justice AD Jagadish Chandira and Justice K Rajasekar noted that since preventive detention was a serious encroachment of one's personal liberty, it was necessary to ensure certain minimum safeguards for the protection of the person sought to be preventively detained.

Numerals Inserted In Provision For Illustrative Clarity, Cannot Override The Provision Itself: Madras HC Holds 1-Year PG Degree Valid For Recruitment

Case Title: K Paranthaman v The Secretary, TNPSC

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 253

The Madras High Court recently observed that numeric illustrations inserted in a provision for clarity and as abundant caution could not add, modify or override the provision itself.

Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy thus ruled that the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission could not hold a Master of Library and Information Science degree as an invalid degree merely because it was of one-year duration and the same would be a pedantic approach.

Biological Siblings Can't Claim Heirship Of Adopted Child; Adoption Severs Ties With Biological Family: Madras High Court

Case Title: V Sakthivel v The Revenue Divisional Officer

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 254

The Madras High Court has recently observed that when a child is adopted, all ties of the child with his or her biological family is deemed to be severed and replaced by those created by the adoption in the adoptive family.

Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan thus noted that the biological family of the adopted child cannot be called the legal heirs of the adopted child and have a claim over the property inherited by him/her from the adoptive family.

ITC Wrongfully Availed But No Fraud/Misstatement Proven; Madras High Court Imposes Token Penalty

Case Title: M/s.Greenstar Fertilisers Limited Versus The Joint Commissioner (Appeals)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 255

The Madras High Court has imposed a token penalty of Rs. 10,000 on the assessee instead of a higher penalty as the assessee wrongfully availed of the input tax credit (ITC), but the department could not prove fraud or misstatement on the part of the assessee.

The bench of Justice C. Saravanan has observed that the assessee reversed the ITC. Penalties under Section 74 deal with situations where credit is availed or utilized by reason of fraud or any wilful misstatement or suppression of facts that was not proved by the department.

Journalists Should Conduct Themselves With Dignity: Madras High Court Refuses Bail To YouTuber Felix Jerald In Savukku Shankar Case

Case Title: Felix Jerald v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 256

The Madras High Court on Monday dismissed the bail petition filed by Youtuber Felix Jerald in a case relating to the interview of Savukku Shankar in which Savukku made derogatory remarks against women police officers.

Justice TV Thamilselvi agreed with the prosecution that by interviewing Shankar, Jerald had provided a platform to the latter, to make such objectionable statements. The judge also pointed out that being a journalist, Jerald was expected to behave in a dignified manner and he could have edited out the derogatory portions of the interview before making it public.

Lacks Inventive Step: Madras High Court Denies Patent To IIT-Madras' Method Of Doping Potassium In Ammonium Perchlorate

Case Title: Indian Institute of Technology v The Controller of Patents & Designs

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 257

The Madras High Court has affirmed an order passed by the Controller of Patents & designs rejecting the patent application filed by Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Madras's method of doping potassium into ammonium perchlorate.

Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy noted that there was no experimental data to show that the method had an economic significance. Further, the court also noted that the claimed invention lacked an inventive step under Section 2(1)(ja) of the Patents Act.

The court noted that the invention merely employed dissolution, filtration, heating, drying and reheating and the resultant product was also a mere variant of an already existing product. Thus, noting that a new reactant was not used while adopting the known process, the court conclude that the claimed invention was excluded from patentability under Section 3(d) of the Patents Act.

[False Promise To Marry] Court Must Ensure That Not Only Are 'Women Not Misused, But Equally That Law Is Not Misused Against Men': Madras HC

Case Title: Rahul Gandhi v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 258

While setting aside a conviction in a sexual harassment case, the Madras High Court recently observed that when the victim already knew that the accused was a married man and father of a child, she could not allege that the consent was obtained on a false promise of marriage.

Justice M Dhandapani observed that while dealing with cases of such nature, the courts had a two-fold duty- firstly to see that women are not misused and secondly and equally that the law is not misused against the male folk. The court noted that though the courts had to give a soft touch to the evidence of the victims on the premise that women would not be the aggressors against males, it was also important to note that no innocent male was subjected to the vagaries of the women folk.

No Legal Right, Can't Say Fee Is Exorbitant: Madras High Court Dismisses Plea To Reduce Application Fee For AIBE

Case Title: Gokul Abhimanyu v Union of India and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 259

The Madras High Court recently dismissed a plea seeking to reduce the application fee for the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) conducted by the Bar Council of India.

The bench of Acting Chief Justice R Mahadevan and Justice GR Swaminathan observed that unlike the enrolment fee prescribed under the Advocates Act, there was no statutory provision relating to the examination fee for the All India Bar Examination. In such a situation, the court noted that there was no legal right, for which a mandamus could be issued.

The court further noted that even in cases where there was no legal right, the court could interfere if it opined that the quantum of fee was exorbitant. In the present case however, the court noted that the application fee was Rs. 3,500/- which could not be called exorbitant.

No Person Should Be Denied Quality Medical Treatment On Economic Ground, State's Duty To Cater Heath Needs Of All: Madras High Court

Case Title: B Anantha Lakshmi and Another v State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 260

While dealing with a case relating to the bond period of PG Doctors, the Madras High Court stressed that a poor person, who is unable to afford paid treatment should not be treated differently.

The court added that while all medical services could not be rendered free of cost to the citizens, the goal of a welfare state must be to move towards affordable and easily accessible healthcare to all of its citizens.

Justice SM Subramaniam added that the postgraduate doctors' plea to count services rendered during the COVID-19 period under their bond policy was unsustainable. The court noted that during such an immense crisis, individuals from different wings of the government came forward and rendered invaluable services and to use this period of selfless service as a way of out-of-bond police was unjustifiable and unacceptable.

Madras High Court Permits Voter To Seek Records Of Disproportionate Assets Case Acquitting Social Welfare Minister Geetha Jeevan

Case Title: S Shanmugasundaram v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 261

The Madras High Court recently allowed a man to file a copy application seeking copies of a disproportionate asset case involving a politician which ended in the acquittal of the public servant. The man had sought copies of a case in which P Geetha Jeevan, the Minister for Social Welfare and Women Empowerment in Tamil Nadu was acquitted.

Justice G Jayachandran noted that when the case involved misconduct by a public servant who was elected in a democratic process, the voters should not be prevented from perusing the records and arriving at a conclusion on whether his representative was falsely prosecuted or had gained un-meritorious acquittal.

Campus Violence By Teachers Is A Very Serious Matter, Cannot Be Condoned By Receiving An Apology Letter: Madras High Court

Case Title: Dr. TV Swaminathan v State and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 262

The Madras High Court recently observed that teachers protesting in colleges violently was a serious matter that could not be condoned merely by receiving an apology letter.

Justice G Jayachandran thus dismissed a petition seeking to quash a criminal case registered against the teaching staff of Pachaiyappa's Trust for protesting. The court added that bypassing the criminal law procedures by obtaining an apology letter for an act of violence inside the college campus was not in the interest of justice.

Madras High Court Directs TN Bar Council To Facilitate Elections For Egmore Court Advocate's Association

Case Title: S Chandan Babu v Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 263

The Madras High Court recently directed the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry to facilitate elections to the Efmore Court Advocate's Association (ECAA).

Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan directed the State Bar Council to appoint an Election Commissioner and the required number of officers to assist the election commissioner in peacefully conducting the election as per the existing approved byelaws of ECAA. The court noted that the Bar Council was bound to take responsibility for conducting peaceful elections to the recognized bar associations and take appropriate disciplinary action in case of any unruly behavior.

The court also directed the Commissioner of Police to provide necessary police protection for the smooth conduct of the elections in the Association premises.

Govt Staff & Institutions Not Suited For Hospitality Industry As It Demands Courteous Treatment & Quick Responses For Customers: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s. SRM Hotels Private Limited v The Principal Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 264

While setting aside the State Government's letter rejecting to renew a lease to SRM Hotels Private Limited, the Madras High Court observed that though the State claimed that the hotel could be managed by the Tamil Nadu Tourism Development Corporation (TTDC), the Government staff and institutions were not suited for the hospitality industry which required courteous treatment from the staff.

Justice GR Swaminathan observed that one of the reasons for disinvestment and outsourcing in the hospitality industry was the State's inability to manage the industry. The court added that certain businesses should be run by private persons.

Tax Demand on Post Sale Discounts Received By Way Of Financial Credit Notes Not Tenable: Madras High Court

Case Title: Tvl. Shivam Steels Versus Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 265

The Madras High Court has quashed the order imposing tax demands on post-sale discounts received by way of financial credit notes on the ground that receiving a discount is not tenable in law.

The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy has observed that the assessing officer concluded that the taxable person is providing a service to the supplier while taking advantage of a discount by facilitating an increase in the volume of sales of such supplier. This conclusion is ex facie erroneous and contrary to the fundamental tenets of GST law.

CCTVs Installed In 99% Police Stations, Footage To Be Preserved For 18 Months: TN Govt Tells Madras High Court

Case Title: K Nizamuddin v The Chief Secretary to Government and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 266

The Madras High Court recently closed a public interest litigation seeking to frame standard operating procedures for preserving, protecting and maintaining the CCTV footages inside police stations and ensuring its availability to prevent possible human rights violation.

The bench of Acting Chief Justice R Mahadevan and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq closed the plea after considering the State's plea that CCTV cameras have been installed in almost 99% of the police stations and steps have been taken to preserve the footage for a period of 18 months.

Madras High Court Sets Aside Conviction Of Former TN Minister Balakrishna Reddy In Alleged Rioting Case

Case Title: Balakrishna Reddy v State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 267

The Madras High Court on Wednesday set aside the conviction and sentence imposed om former Tamil Nadu Minister Balakrishna Reddy.

Justice G Jayachandran noted that there were several lacunas in the prosecution case and the benefit had to be given to the appellant (Balakrishnan). The orders were passed on appeals preferred by Reddy and others challenging his conviction.

In January 2019, a special court had convicted Reddy to 3 year imprisonment in a 1998 arson case in connection with a protest against illicit liquor. Over 150 villagers had gathered in front of Bagalur Police Station and protested against police inaction in removing illicit arrack units in the area. The special court had convicted Reddy after noting the damage to public property, and burning of police vehicles.

“Legal Service Is Not Business”: Madras HC Asks State Bar Councils To Take Action Against Lawyers Soliciting Work Through Online Service Providers

Case Title: Mr.P.N.Vignesh v The Chairman and Members of the Bar Council, BCI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 268

The Madras High Court has come down heavily on lawyers soliciting work through online websites in violation of Bar Council of India Rules. The court has asked the Bar Council of India to issue circulars/instructions/guidelines to State Bar Councils to initiate disciplinary proceedings against lawyers for advertising or soliciting their services directly or indirectly.

The court added that action should be taken against any form of advertising including furnishing newspaper comments, or producing photographs to be published in connection with cases, etc.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan noted that the legal profession, unlike others, was not a job or a business and the intention was to provide welfare to the society. The court added that though a fee was paid to the lawyers, it was paid out of respect for their time and knowledge. The court added that providing ranking or customer ratings to lawyers demeaned the profession and was against dignity and integrity.

Madras High Court Orders Status Quo On Online Sale Of Drugs Till Finalisation Of Draft Rules, Asks Govt To Ensure Sale Only Through Licensed Chemists

Case Title: M/s.Practo Technologies Pvt.Ltd v The Tamil Nadu Chemists and Druggists Association and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 269

The Madras High Court recently disposed of an appeal against an order of a single judge prohibiting the online sale of drugs and cosmetics.

Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan took note of the Government's submission that it was in the process of finalizing a new policy. The court directed the Union Government and the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation to expedite and finalize the police and notify the same.

Till such time, the court ordered status quo on the condition that online sale of drugs must be made only through or by licensed Druggists and Chemists. The court directed the competent authorities to initiate appropriate action against the individual offenders in the manner known to the law. The court noted that the policy will have far-reaching consequences and the Government would have to consider various issues raised by the stakeholders.

Disciplinary Authority Must Record Reasons If Disagree With Enquiry Authority: Madras High Court

Case Title: T.S.Jawahar Ali Khan v State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 270

A single judge bench of the Madras High Court, comprising Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, while deciding a Writ Petition held that the disciplinary authority must record its reasons for disagreeing with the findings of the enquiry authority against an employee's dismissal.

After Special Sunday Hearing, Madras High Court Allows BSP Leader Armstrong's Burial To Be Held At Thiruvallur

Case Title: Porkodi v State and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 271

After a special hearing held on Sunday morning, the Madras High Court permitted the burial of late Bahujan Samaj Party Tamil Nadu chief Armstrong to be held at a private property in Pothur Village in Thiruvallur district in Tamil Nadu. The court also gave liberty to the petitioners to approach the authority if they intended to construct a memorial manimandapam, hospital, school etc in Armstrong's name.

Justice Bhavani Subbaroyan also asked all parties to co-operate with the government and conduct the burial procession in a peaceful manner. The court further directed the police to give appropriate police protection for the procession.

The court passed orders on petition filed by wife of late BSP leader K Armstrong seeking permission to bury his body in the party office at Chennai.

Madras High Court Refuses To Set Aside Conviction Of Former Tamil Nadu Minister Aranganayagam In Disproportionate Asset Case

Case Title: C.Aranganayagam (Deceased) v The State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 272

The Madras High Court recently refused to set aside the conviction of former Tamil Nadu Labour Minister C Aranganayagam in a disproportionate assets case. While the court dismissed an appeal preferred by Arangayagam, it also upheld the acquittal of Anraganayagam's family members.

Justice G Jayachandran thus confirmed the confiscation of properties of Arangayagam, who passed away on April 29, 2021.

The case against Arangayagam was that while serving as the Minister for Labour and Education, during 1991-1996, he had accumulated wealth disproportionate to his income. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Chennai registered a case and he was charged with offenses under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Along with Arangayagam, a case was also registered against his wife and two sons for abetment.

Tamil Nadu Govt Should Revisit Its Liquor Policy For Welfare Of Citizens; Present Rules Appear To Protect TASMAC Shops, Bars: High Court

Case Title: D Prabhu v The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 273

The Madras High Court recently noted that it was high time that the Government of Tamil Nadu rethink its liquor policy for the welfare of the people in the state, especially the younger generation who are the pillars of tomorrow.

The court added that a conscious decision could be taken based on public opinion and though taking a decision may not be an easy task, that should not justify the State's support to the liquor policy presently in place.

The bench of Justice R Suresh Kumar and Justice G Arul Murugan noted that the Government Rules, regarding the location of TASMAC shops, should be for the protection and welfare of the people. However, presently, the Rules appear to be made to protect the TASMAC shops whose aim is to enhance the sale of intoxicating material that ultimately affect the society.

Madurai Adheenam Succession Row: Madras High Court Dismisses Nityananda Sami's Plea Against Substituting Senior Pontiff In Suit

Case Title: Sri Nithyanadha Swami v .Sri La Sri Harihara

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 274

The Madras High Court recently dismissed a petition filed by Sri Nithyananda Swami challenging an order of the Principal Subordinate Court, Madurai allowing successor senior pontiff Sri Harihara Gnanasambanda Desiga Paramachariya Swamigal to be added to the suit pending in relation to appointment of a junior pontiff to the Madurai Adheenam.

Justice R Vijayakumar opined that the application for amendment did not call for any interference.

Direct Govt Officers, Pleaders To Conduct Land Cases Properly; Initiate Action Against Them In Case Of Ex-Parte Decrees: Madras HC To State

Case Title: SV Subbiah v Bar Council of Tamil Nadu & Puducherry and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 275

The Madras High Court has recently directed the State Government to issue appropriate circulars to all District Collectors, competent authorities and to Government Pleaders indicating them to conduct Government-related land cases properly and defend the government on merits and per the law.

The court also called for coordination between Government Pleaders and officials for defending cases across courts in the State.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan added that in case of any ex-parte decree being passed by the courts, any improper conduct by the Government Pleader or official concerned must be identified and the competent authority must initiate appropriate action.

“Discriminates Based On Sex”: Madras High Court Strikes Down Govt Order Reserving Compassionate Appointment In Noon Meal Schemes For Women

Case Title: G Karthikeyan v The Government of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 276

The Madras High Court recently declared illegal, a Government Order (GO) reserving compassionate appointments in the Noon Meal Scheme to females.

Noting that the GO was violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy noted that it not only affected the male children of female employees but put the female employees a par below to that of their male counterparts.

The court noted that if 100% of the vacancies in a particular department are reserved for women, the applications for compassionate appointment could be forwarded to the District Collector or to the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department to be considered under the general pool for being appointed in other suitable posts.

When Those Knowingly Consuming Spurious Liquor Can Be Given Rs 10 Lakh,Innocent Victims Deserve No Less: Madras HC In Burn Victim's Case

Case Title: Arjunan v The Government of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 277

While granting compensation to the family of a man who succumbed to burn injuries sustained while disposing of bio-medical waste, the Madras High Court recently remarked that when the government could pay families of persons who knowingly consumed spurious liquor Rs. 10 Lakh, the innocent victims deserved no less.

Justice GR Swaminathan added that it was unfortunate that the State resisted such applications in which it should have conceded the prayer straightaway. The court noted that it was an apposite case for invoking the Doctrine of Benevolent exercise of Power and thus granted compensation to the family.

Madras High Court Sentences Thiruvarur Sub-Registrar To 2 Months Imprisonment For Fabricating Court Documents In Connivance With Litigant

Case Title: High Court of Madras v D Sasikumar and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 278

The Madras High Court has recently sentenced Sub-Registrar, Thiruvarur to two months of simple imprisonment for conniving with a private individual and fabricating documents which were produced in court for getting favorable orders. The court, however, suspended the execution of imprisonment for 30 days allowing the parties to file an appeal.

Justice N Sathish Kumar observed that if the court shuts its eye to such actions, it would encourage unscrupulous officials to engage in such activities with private individuals and achieve their goals. The court thus emphasized that such fabrication of documents could not be condoned especially in registering officers where the entries have a bearing on the rights of the individuals.

Madras High Court Stays Re-Release Of Kamal Hassan Starrer Film “Guna”Amidst Copyright Infringement Claims

Case Title: Ghanshyam Hemdev v Pyramid Audio India Pvt Ltd and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 279

The Madras High Court has stayed the re-release of Kamal Hassan starrer 1991 Tamil Movie “Gunaa” amidst copyright infringement claims.

Justice P Velmurugan granted an ad-interim injunction on an application made by Ghanshyam Hemdev. Noting that the balance of convenience favored Hemdev, the court was inclined to grant the ad interim injunction. Meanwhile, the court also issued notices to the respondents, Pyramid Audio India Pvt Ltd, Evergreen Media Pvt Ltd, and Prasad Film Laboratories.

“India Land Of Diverse Religions & Customs”: Madras High Court Sets Aside Punishment On Muslim Policeman For Keeping Beard

Case Title: G.Abdul Khadar Ibrahim v Commissioner of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 280

The Madras High Court recently came to the rescue of a police constable, who was punished for keeping a beard "following the commandments of Prophet Mohammed".

Stating that India is a land of diverse religions and customs, bench of Justice L Victoria Gowri held though police department warranted maintaining strict discipline, it would not mean that a personnel belonging to the minority community can be punished for maintaining a beard.

The court noted that as per an Office Memorandum issued to the Madras Police Gazette, while permission could not be granted to officers to maintain beard, Muslim police officers were entitled to maintain a beard throughout their lifetime.

Madras High Court Allows Muharram Processions In Ervadi, Says Fundamental Rights Must Take Precedence Over Fundamentalist Forces

Case Title: Thameem Sindha Madar v The District Collector and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 281

The Madras High Court has allowed the conducting of Muharram ceremonies with the beat of drums, santhanakoodu, and Kuthirai pancha processions in the Ervadi Town in Tirunelveli district of Tamil Nadu.

Justice GR Swaminathan emphasized that the right to conduct a religious procession was protected under Article 19(1)(b) and (d) of the Constitution and it was not open for members of fundamentalist Thowheed Jamath to dictate how other members should conduct the festival. The court also added that when one's fundamental rights were under threat, the administration had a duty to uphold the rights but it was unfortunate that the administration had succumbed to the threats held out by the Thowheed Jamath members.

The court also remarked that like language, religion was not the same everywhere, and if the people in Ervadi believed in Music, the beat of drums, horse, and chariot processions, to expect them to conform to Saudi Arabian practice was nothing short of a Talibanic outlook.

Minor Girl's Aborted Foetus Not To Be Given To Police Or Court, Must Be Kept In Forensic Lab & Destroyed After Completion Of Case: Madras HC

Case Title: Kajendran J v Superintendent of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 282

Noting that there was no standard operating procedure to deal with the products of conception after a Medical Termination of Pregnancy done for a minor pregnant girl, the Madras High Court observed that a guideline needed to be issued and followed across the state.

The bench of Justice N Anand Venkatesh and Justice Sunder Mohan noted that after a fetus less than 24 weeks old was completely sent to Forensic Science Lab and analysis was done, there was no standard operating procedure available and there was no facility to preserve the product of conception. The court thus made it clear that once the analysis was complete and a report was submitted by the FSL, the sample should be retained by the FSL till the completion of the case and destroyed after that.

The court also emphasized that the samples should not be handed over to the investigation officer and should never reach the hands of the victim girl or her family. With respect to fetus beyond 24 weeks, the court noted that the femur alone was handed over to the FSL, and the rest of the products of conception should be treated as Bio-Medical waste and destroyed as per the procedure.

'ED Action Without Any Basis' : Madras High Court Stops Money Laundering Probe Against Contractors Over Sand Mining

Case Title: K Govindaraj v Union of India and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 283

The Madras High Court recently restrained the Enforcement Directorate from carrying out its investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act against private contractors in connection with alleged illegal sand mining.

The Court noted that there was no scheduled offence in the present case and hence the PMLA investigation was not sustainable. Till there was a scheduled offence registered and detection of the proceeds of crime, the ED cannot carry out its investigation.

The bench of Justice MS Ramesh and Justice Sunder Mohan observed that the ED had initiated the proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act without any basis and without identifying any proceeds of crime. It noted that sand mining was not covered under the scheduled offences under the PMLA. The court added that unless a case in the scheduled offence was registered and such an offence generated proceeds of crime, the ED could not have initiated any action. The court further observed that even if ED's materials were to be accepted, it would only show that they have unearthed large-scale illegal mining that generated illegal money.

Peaceful Protests Deepen Reach Of Democracy, Increase Chances Of Its Survival: Madras High Court Allows Protests By BJP In Tirunelveli

Case Title: Kandasamy v The District Superintendent of Police and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 284

While asking the state to consider a representation by the Bharatiya Janata Party to conduct a protest, the Madras High Court highlighted that the right to expression is an essential part of democracy.

Justice G Jayachandran observed that in a democratic country, every political party had a right to conduct an agitation, and a peaceful protest could deepen a democracy's reach and improve its chances of survival.

“Transfer Certificates Not A Tool For Schools To Collect Arrears Of Fees From Parents”: Madras High Court

Case Title: State of Tamil Nadu and Others v All India Private Schools Legal Protection Society

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 285

The Madras High Court has directed the State Government to issue circulars/instructions/orders to all the school administrations across the State, asking them not to insist on the production of a Transfer Certificate by a child seeking admission. The court has also asked the schools to refrain from making unnecessary entries in the TC regarding non-payment or delayed payment of the school fee. The court added that in case of any violation, appropriate action should be initiated under the RTE Act and other relevant laws.

Noting that TC was not a tool for schools to collect arrears of fee from the parents, the bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan observed that when an entry regarding arrears of fee is made in the TC, it would stigmatize the child and was a form of mental harassment under Section 17 of the Right to Education Act.

"License Suspended Straightaway Without Issuing Improvement Notice": Madras High Court Stays Suspension Of KFC Operator's License In Thoothukudi

Case Title: Sapphire Foods India Ltd v The Commissioner

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 286

The Madras High Court has stayed an order passed by the Tamil Nadu Food Safety and Drug Administration Department suspending the license of Sapphire Foods India Ltd, operators of the fast-food chain KFC in Thoothukudi.

Justice GR Swaminathan agreed with the petitioners and observed that the order was liable to be dealt with on several grounds. The court noted that as per the Food Safety and Standards Act 2006, the authorities were to first issue an improvement notice and in case of non-compliance, could suspend the license. In the present case, the court noted that the authorities had straightaway suspended the license in the first instance.

Shocking That Lawyer Is Seeking Protection To Run Brothel: Madras HC Asks State Bar Council To Ensure Members Are Enrolled From 'Reputed Institutions'

Case Title: Raja Murrugan v Superintendent of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 287

Expressing shock over a lawyer seeking protection for running a brothel center, the Madras High Court has asked the state bar council to ensure that members are enrolled only from reputed institutions and restrict the enrolment from unreputed institutions from Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, and other states.

Justice B Pugalendhi observed that it was high time the bar council realised that the reputation of advocates was decreasing in the society. The court added that it was unfortunate that the brother service business was being done by a person claiming to be an advocate from the Kanyakumari District which is known for being 100% literate.

Interest Can't Be Demanded When Entire Stamp Duty Paid During Pendency Of Appeal: Madras High Court

Case Title: The Chief Revenue Controlling Authority Chennai Versus R.Muniyandi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 288

The Madras High Court has held that interest cannot be demanded when the entire amount as demanded by the authorities has been paid even during the pendency of the appeal.

The bench of Justice R. Vijayakumar has observed that the present appeal has been filed under Section 47-A(10) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Only after orders are passed by the Court will the liability get fastened upon the purchaser to pay interest on the belated payment. The entire amount as demanded by the authorities has been paid even during the pendency of the appeal. The interest cannot be demanded because the belated payment does not arise.

No Prior Sanction Needed To Prosecute Officers Below Rank Of Inspector, Article 14 Cannot Be Applied Against Administrative Hierarchy: Madras HC

Case Title: Karthikeyan and Others v Thangapandian

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 289

The Madras High Court has made it clear that no prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC is needed to prosecute police officers below the rank of Inspector of Police.

The bench of Justice AD Jagadish Chandira and Justice K Rajasekar observed that though Article 14 of the Constitution guaranteed the right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law, it could not be misconstrued to apply against the hierarchies in the administrative aspects.

The court was answering a reference made to it on whether the term “removable by government” could be interpreted in a broad perspective to include police officers from the rank of Constable to Inspector of Police.

The court noted that the legislation, in its wisdom, had restricted the scope and application of the provision with a reasonable differentia. The court added that if the word “any person” in Article 14 of the Constitution was assumed to have exempted and excluded classification and restriction in all enactments, no statute with any reasonable differentia could ever be implemented.

Madras High Court Laments Political Favours Preventing Police From Acting Against Voter Bribery In Elections

Case Title: Arulraj and another v The Inspector of Police and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 290

The Madras High Court recently criticized the police force for not acting appropriately in cases involving bribery during elections. The court remarked that though the police were the only machinery that could act against such offenses, in many cases, the police were taking sides and not prosecuting expecting favors from political parties.

Justice B Pugalendhi further observed that bribing voters during an election was not just an offense against an individual but an offense against society. The court added that such bribing destroys the very basis of democracy. The court also remarked that since the police were not acting against the offenders, people ended up committing subsequent offence.

Foreign Tax Credit Can't Be Denied In Spite Of Accepting Computation: Madras High Court

Case Title: Thejo Engineering Limited Versus The Deputy Director of Income Tax

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 291

The Madras High Court has held that the claim of foreign tax credit cannot be denied in spite of accepting the computation.

The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, on examining the company tax return and the activity statements, appears prima facie that the petitioner has remitted taxes through the Australian branch. It is clear that foreign tax credit in respect thereof was claimed by the petitioner by filing Form 67 with relevant annexures. On examining the intimation under Section 143(1) and the rectification order, the foreign tax credit was computed by the assessing officer, and the computation tallied with the foreign tax credit claim of the assessee. In spite of accepting the computation of the taxpayer, the tax credit relief was denied.

Unilateral Appointment Of Arbitrator & Non Service Of Notice :Madras High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Award

Case Title: Vipul Kumar Tulsian and anr vs M/s.Sundaram Finance Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 292

The Madras High Court bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy has set aside an arbitral award where the opposite party proceeded with arbitration unilaterally and appointed the Arbitrator without any intimation to the claimants. Further, the claimants neither received notices of hearing nor appeared before the Tribunal, and consequently, the Arbitrator did not afford any opportunity to claimants to contest the matter.

Therefore, the bench held that such an arbitral award was against the public policy of India and violated the principles of natural justice.

Formal Contract Signature Not Required To Enforce Arbitration Clause If Parties Are Ad Idem: Madras High Court

Case Title: Larsen & Toubro Limited vs M/s.Texmo Pipes and Products Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 293

The Madras High Court division bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy has held that if it is proved that if it is established that the parties are ad idem, a formal contract signature by the other party is not necessary to enforce the arbitration agreement.

The High Court noted that, to establish an arbitration agreement, there must be mutual consent between the parties. Section 7(4)(b) of the Arbitration Act allows an arbitration agreement to be derived from various forms of communication, including electronic means, as amended by the 2015 Amendment Act. This provision states that even without a formal contract, if parties are found to be ad idem, they cannot avoid liability under the agreement.

The High Court emphasized the importance of the parties' intentions in determining the existence of an arbitration agreement. It held that arbitration is fundamentally consensual and its enforcement relies on the parties' agreement to settle disputes through this mechanism.

Madras HC Revives Breach Of Privilege Notices Issued To CM Stalin & Other MLAs, Says Proceedings Didn't Lapse Merely Due To Change In Govt

Case Title: The Secretary, Tamilnadu Legislative Assembly v P Sivakumar (batch cases)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 294

The Madras High Court on Wednesday set aside a single judge order that quashed show cause notices issued to current CM MK Stalin and other MLAs from the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam party on the issue of breach of privilege while displaying gutka sachets inside the Tamil Nadu Legislative assembly in 2017.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan made it clear that issues such as breach of privilege could not be washed away with a new assembly. The court highlighted that such issues should be deliberated for the people's best interest.

Though it was argued that the breach of privilege proceedings lapse with the dissolution of the assembly, the court noted that if such a view was to be accepted, the purpose of granting privileges would become meaningless. The court highlighted that in such situations, the members may end up not taking the privileges seriously thus leading to utter chaos.

RTE Act Extends To Education From Kindergarten To 8th Standard Irrespective Of Child's Age, LKG & UKG Classes Covered Under Scheme: Madras HC

Case Title: Deepak and Another v The Chief Educational Officer and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 295

The Madras High Court recently observed that the LKG and UKG classes would be covered under the Right to Education scheme as the state is regularly reimbursing the expenses incurred by these classes in the schools.

Justice Anita Sumanth noted that the object of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act was to make education available for all children from pre-school till 8^th Standard and the same was paramount while understanding the Act. The court thus stated that the object of providing education would override any other technical concerns.

Madras High Court Grants Bail To Youtuber Felix Jerald In Savukku Shankar Case, Asks Him To Close His YouTube Channel

Case Title: Felix Jerald v The State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 296

The Madras High Court has granted bail to Youtuber Felix Jerald in a case pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore. The court however asked Jerald to close his YouTube channel “RedPix 24x7” in which the interview with Savukku Shankar was aired.

Justice TV Thamilselvi passed the orders on a petition filed by Jerald. Previously, when Jerald had moved a bail petition with respect to the case registered by the Cyber Police, the court had dismissed the petition noting that Jerald had provided a platform to Shankar for making the alleged defamatory statements.

Madras High Court Quashes Proceedings Against Former DGP For Allegedly Forwarding Offensive WhatsApp Message About MK Stalin

Case Title: Natraj v Inspector of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 297

The Madras High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against R Natraj, former DGP and ex-MLA for allegedly forwarding an offensive message about CM MK Stalin in a WhatsApp Group.

Justice G Jayachandran was inclined to quash the proceedings after Natraj expressed regret for his conduct and informed the court that he was willing to circulate the affidavit filed by him, expressing regret, in the WhatsApp group in which the offensive message was forwarded.

It was alleged that Natraj had forwarded a message in a WhatsApp group consisting of 73 members about a statement purported to have been made by MK Stalin. It was further alleged that the message was forwarded to create enmity and ill-will between the two groups.

1997 Melavalavu Massacre | Madras High Court Asks State To Revoke Remission Of Accused After He Was Accused Of Attacking Man

Case Title: A Manikandan v The State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 298

The Madras High Court has asked the state authorities to revoke the remission order and restore the conviction and sentence imposed on Sekar, one of the accused in the 1997 Melavalavu Massacre after he was accused of attacking a man.

The bench of Justice AD Jagadish Chandira and Justice K Rajasekar noted that though as per Clause 4 and 5 of the Bond Form No. 130 under Rule 341(8) of the Tamil Nadu Prison Rules, 1983 puts a probation period of three years, it could not be assumed that after such period the life convict could indulge in any crime and that the authorities need not bother about the same.

Madras High Court Strikes Down Section 77A Of Registration (Tamil NaduSecond Amendment) Act As Unconstitutional

Case Title: M Kathirvel v The Inspector General of Registration

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 299

The Madras has held that the 2022 Amendment which introduced Section 77A to the Registration Act with respect to Tamil Nadu and gave powers to the District Registrar to cancel an instrument if it was found to be fraudulent or bogus was unconstitutional.

The bench of Justice SS Sundar and Justice N Senthilkumar held that through the amendment, the registering authority was given an unfettered, unguided, and unlimited power which may end up causing irretrievable damage to the real owners of the properties and affect their rights.

Detention Order Can't Be Issued If Driver In Possession Of Valid E-Way Bill In Physical/Electronic Form: Madras High Court

Case Title: Kompress India Private Limited Versus Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 300

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court while quashing the detention order held that if an invoice, bill of supply, delivery challan, or bill of entry and a valid e-way bill in physical or electronic form for verification are available, then action may not be initiated.

The bench of Justice S.Srimathy has observed that the respondent department issued the notice, carried out the inspection on the same day, and also passed the order on the same day. As per the provisions prescribed, the respondents department ought to grant time for seven days to reply. Since the inspection, notice, and orders were passed on the same day, there is a clear violation of the principles of natural justice.

Person Inviting Threat By His Criminal Or Anti-Social Activities Not Entitled To Police Protection: Madras High Court

Case Title: NT Stalin Barathi v The District Collector

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 301

While rejecting a man's application for police protection, the Madras High Court recently observed that police protection should be granted only in appropriate cases, and granting police protection to a person who had invited a situation of threat due to his criminal or anti-social activities will be against public morality.

The bench of Justice SS Sundar and Justice N Senthilkumar added that in our country, several journalists had lost their lives for publishing news against corruption and social evils, government officials were murdered while preventing illegal sand mining and theft and people fighting for public cause were targeted. The court added that the state could consider granting police protection to such protection but not to persons who, due to their own conduct, were faced with threat perception.

Madras HC Quashes Loan Condition Seeking Apology From Applicant For Sticking Posters Against Bank, Says It's A Legitimate Mode Of Protest

Case Title: P.Sibiga Dharshini v The District Collector and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 302

The Madras High Court recently quashed a pre-release condition imposed by the Indian Overseas Bank asking a student to give an apology letter for circulating posters against the Bank while sanctioning her education loan.

Justice Murali Shankar noted that the Nationalised Banks could not treat a loan applicant, especially a student as their servant or a person obeying their orders. The court added that even if it was accepted that the student's father was the office bearer of the NGO which had protested against the Bank, it was not a ground for the Bank to seek an apology from the student who had nothing to do with the protest.

Madras High Court Sets Aside Discharge Of Ministers KKSSR Ramachandran & Thangam Thenarasu In Disproportionate Assets Case

Case Title: Suo Motu RC v Additional Superintendent of Police and Suo Motu RC v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 303

The Madras High Court on Wednesday set aside the discharge of Ministers KKSSR Ramachandran and Thangam Thenarasu in disproportionate assets case.

Justice Anand Venkatesh reversed the discharge of the ministers and directed them to appear before the Special Court. Finding that there was prima facie material to proceed with the trial, the court directed the special court to frame charges and proceed with the trial expeditiously on a day-to-day basis.

Calling it one of the worst forms of abuse of process, the court noted that the conduct of the Investigating Officers pointed to a clear nexus between the DVAC and politicians to ensure that criminal prosecutions were short-circuited against the ministers after they came to power. The court added that the statutory power of further investigation had been used for oblique purposes.

Madras High Court Dismisses TN Minister Anitha Radhakrishnan's Plea Challenging PMLA Proceedings By ED

Case Title: Anitha R Radhakrishnan v The Directorate of Enforcement and another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 304

The Madras High Court on Wednesday dismissed a petition filed by the Tamil Nadu Fisheries Minister challenging the PMLA proceedings initiated by the Enforcement Proceedings against him.

Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam dismissed Radhakrishnan's plea and asked him to cooperate with the investigating agency to complete the probe in the money laundering case and allow it to file a final report before the special court.

The allegation against the Minister is that while serving as an MLA of Tiruchendur Assembly Constituency and subsequently as a Minister for Housing and Urban Development Department during the period from 2002-2006, he acquired assets disproportionate to his known sources of income to the tune of Rs.2,68,24,7555/- in his name, his wife's name, two brothers and three sons. Based on this, the Directorate of Enforcement filed an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) which was sought to be quashed in the present case.

Madras High Court Forbids Deity's "Imprisonment", Says Temple Can't Be Sealed Citing Law & Order Without Allowing Customary Puja

Case Title: G Pandi v The District Collector and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 305

The Madras High Court recently expanded the scope of treating a deity as a juristic personality in law and held that when an idol in a temple is treated as a living person, closing the temple without allowing the customary pujas would amount to the deity's imprisonment. The court observed that no temple could be locked and sealed on the grounds of law and order.

Justice GR Swaminathan observed that just like how a devotee has the right to offer worship, the deity also has a right to observance of the customary rituals. The court highlighted that it had to exercise parens patriae jurisdiction whenever the interests of minors, the mentally ill, and idols were at stake and thus, it was the duty of the court to uphold the right of the parties to perform rituals. The court thus made it clear that as long as there was no practice of untouchability or other practices offending the rights of others, a temple could not be closed or shut down indefinitely.

Madras High Court Sets Aside Detention Of Youtuber Savukku Shankar, Says There Was An Element Of Malice In Entire State Action

Case Title: A Kamala v State and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 306

The Madras High Court on Friday set aside the detention of Youtuber Savukku Shankar under the Tamil Nadu Preventive Detention Act.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam ordered Shankar to be released forthwith if he was not required in any other case. The court observed that the detention order passed by the State was not compliant with the essential requirements for invoking the Preventive Detention Act.

The court noted that there was an element of malice in the action taken by the State. The court observed that the State had moved with a prejudicial view in light of the publications made by Shankar against the Government and its officials.

Madras High Court Directs Production Company 'Studio Green' To Deposit ₹1 Crore Each Before Releasing 'Thangalaan' And 'Kanguva' Movies

Case Title: The Official Assignee v S Arjunlal Sunderdas (Died) and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 307

The Madras High Court had directed the production company Studio Green to deposit one crore each before releasing the movies Thangalaan starring Chiyan Vikram and Kanguva starring Suriya.

The bench of Justice G Jayachandran and Justice CV Karthikeyan made the orders on an execution petition filed by an Official Assignee appointed by the High Court to deal with the estate of realtor and financier Arjunlal Sunderdas after he was declared insolvent. In 2019, the division bench had allowed a petition filed by the Official Assignee directing Studio Green to pay a sum of Rs. 10,35,00,000/- with an interest of 18% p.a.

Madras High Court Imposes Rs 50K Cost On Litigant For "Disruptive Attitude" During PIL Hearing

Case Title: Kannan Swaminathan v Union of India and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 308

The Madras High Court recently imposed a cost of Rs 50,000 on a litigant for filing a public interest litigation without any public element.

The bench of Acting Chief Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice PB Balaji noted that the litigant had displayed a disruptive attitude during court proceedings and had no regard for the court's decorum. Even after engaging a counsel, the court observed that the litigant kept arguing parallelly and disrupted the court proceedings. The court thus directed him to deposit Rs. 50K to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority.

No Bar In Registering Case And Counter Case Arising Out Of Same Incident, IO Must Probe Both Versions According To Standing Orders: Madras HC

Case Title: T Balaji v The State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 309

The Madras High Court has issued a set of guidelines to all stakeholders for dealing with cases and counter cases.

A full bench of Justice G Jayachandran, Justice M Nirmal Kumar, and Justice N Anand Venkatesh were answering a reference made to it relating to case and counter case and how the courts and investigation agencies were required to handle them.

The question that was referred to the full bench was whether the police were required to mandatorily follow the procedure prescribed in the Police Standing Order 566 while investigating a case and counter case and what was the effect of its non-compliance.

The court observed that there was no legal bar in registering two FIRs in a case and a counter-case arising out of rival versions of the same incident. In such cases, the court added that the investigation officer was required to thoroughly investigate both rival versions keeping in mind the PSO.

Kallakurichi Hooch Tragedy | Financial Relief Not 'Reward' For Victims But To Help Dependents: Madras HC Dismisses Plea Challenging ₹10 Lakh Compensation

Case Title: D Kumaresh v The Chief Secretary

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 310

The Madras High Court recently dismissed a petition challenging the payment of Rs 10 Lakh as ex gratia payment to the families of Kallakurichi Hooch tragedy victims.

Justice SS Sundar and Justice N Senthilkumar dismissed the plea after noting that the ex gratia payments were made on humanitarian grounds. The court noted that the relief was to reward the victims but to help the dependents of the victims who had lost their breadwinners and were struggling economically.

The court further held that the petition was filed without collecting much information challenging a relief package that was paid to ensure the survival of the victim's family with dignity. The court was thus not inclined to entertain the plea, which was challenging the policy decision of the government.

Madras High Court Quashes Case Against AIADMK Leader C Ve Shanmugam For Comments Against MK Stalin, Other DMK Ministers

Case Title: C. Ve Shanmugam v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 311

The Madras High Court has quashed a case registered against AIADMK MP C.Ve Shanmugam for his comments against CM MK Stalin and other leaders while participating in a hunger strike.

Justice G Jayachandran noted that the alleged comments made by Shanmugam did not cause any disturbance to the harmony nor affected the public tranquillity. The court also noted that the complaints were filed 40 days after the alleged speeches were made which itself would show that no untoward incident was reported due to the alleged speech. The court observed that though the utterances were unparliamentary, it would not attract the offences alleged against Shanmugam.

Madras High Court Allows BJP's Bike Rally For Independence Day, Asks DGP To Not Prohibit Rallies Carrying National Flags With Dignity

Case Title: A Krishna Prasath v The Director General of Police and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 312

The Madras High Court on Wednesday allowed the Bharatiya Janata Party to conduct a bike rally in Coimbatore carrying the National Flag, as part of the Independence Day Celebrations.

Justice G Jayachandran allowed the petition filed by A Krishna Prasath, District Secretary of the BJP- Yuva Morcha, Coimbatore District.

The court did not find "merit" in the apprehensions raised by the State while denying permission for the rally. It also directed the Director General of Police not to prohibit rallies where the participants carried national flags with dignity and were not causing any hindrance to the traffic.

Making Remarks About CM, Pointing Failure To Fulfil Poll Promises Not Obscene Or Causing Enmity: Madras High Court

Case Title: C Ve Shanmugam v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 313

While quashing cases registered against AIADMK MP C VE Shanmugam for his remarks against Chief Minister MK Stalin during a hunger strike condemning the arrest of former Minister Jayakumar, the Madras High Court observed that making remarks about the government and pointing out the failure to fulfil poll promises would not amount to causing enmity between groups.

Justice G Jayachandran held that per the records, it was clear that the state machinery had been misused as a tool by the ruling party to crush the voice of the opposition and thus the cases deserved to be quashed.

Taxpayer Can't Be Mulcted With Unjust Penalty Due To Minor Discrepancy Of PIN Code In GST Registration: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s.Jindal Pipes Limited Versus The Deputy State Tax Officer (Int)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 314

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has held that the taxpayer cannot be mulcted with an unjust penalty due to a minor discrepancy in the PIN code in the GST registration, and the tax invoices are to be construed as a minor violation of the provisions of the respective GST enactments.

The bench of Justice C. Saravanan has observed that the imposition of a penalty for technical venial breach of the provisions or the minor discrepancy in the variance in the address in the tax invoices and the e-way bill would not justify the penalty under Section 129(5) of the GST enactments.

Right To Practise Law Is A Fundamental Right, Bar Associations Not Empowered To Restrain Lawyers From Appearing Before Any Court: Madras HC

Case Title: V Senthil v The Secretary, Bar Council of TN & Puducherry

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 315

The Madras High Court recently observed that a bar association was not empowered to restrict a lawyer from appearing in court. The court observed that the right to practice law was a fundamental right and such a right could not be taken away by the Bar Association by suspending lawyers.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan further added that an advocate was expected to maintain a cordial relationship with the members of the Bar Association to ensure that the court proceedings are not obstructed.

The court noted that even the Apex Court had observed that boycotts should be used as a last resort by the Bar Association and there could not be continuous boycotts by lawyers affecting the rights of litigants and the justice delivery system.

Fake Doctors Are Menace To Society, Practicing Allopathy After DiplomaIn Indian System Of Medicine Serious Issue: Madras High Court

Case Title: K Amrithalal v The Director of Public Health and Preventive Medicine

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 316

The Madras High Court has recently observed that persons who practice the Allopathy system of medicine after getting a diploma certificate in other Indian systems of medicine were playing with the lives of innocent people who came to them believing them to be genuine doctors.

Justice Murali Shankar noted that fake doctors were a menace to society and the government was expected to deal with them with iron hands. The court however lamented that instead of taking action, the police remained mute spectators and got themselves satisfied with the imposition of fine.

Don't Want To Open Pandoras Box: Madras High Court Junks Plea To DeclareThirukkural As National Book

Case Title: M Selva Kumar v Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 317

The Madras High Court recently dismissed a petition seeking to declare Thiru Kural as a “National Book with high values and virtues of India” or the “National Literature of virtue with Ethics of India”.

Thirukural, written by Saint Thiruvalluvar, is a Tamil language text containing short couplets that deal with teachings on virtue, wealth, and love among other social and political issues.

Dismissing a petition filed by one Selva Kumar, the Madurai bench of Justice R Subramaniam and Justice Victoria Gowri said that the declaration was a policy decision, to be taken by the concerned government and was not within the domain of the court. The bench also said that it did not want to open a pandoras box as allowing the prayer would result in a situation where every high court would end up passing orders for declaring a particular text as national book.

ESOP Employee Without Any Contractual Obligation is , Perquisite',Taxable As Salary U/s 17(2) : Madras High Court

Case Title: Nishithkumar Mukeshkumar Mehta vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 318

While pointing out that the payment by FPS was not made towards the ESOPs as the Assessee continues to hold the ESOP (Employee Stock Option Purchase) even after the receipt of the compensation, the Madras High Court held the receipt in hands of Assessee qualifies as perquisite and taxable under the head 'Salaries'.

Hence, the High Court refuses to allow 'Nil' certificate of tax deduction u/s 192 in reference to such compensation, which is to be treated as perquisite in lieu of 'salary'.

Further, Section 17(2) of the Income Tax Act provides for the valuation of perquisites for tax purposes, which is equal to the cost which has been incurred by the organization/ employer for/ on behalf of the employee.

Only Gender Centric Offences Excluded From Plea Bargaining: Madras High Court Lays Down Suggestions For Trial Courts

Case Title: Mr G Venkateshan v The State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 319

The Madras High Court has emphasised that the term “offences against women” which is excluded from plea bargaining would mean only gender-centric or gender-neutral offences and not non-gender offences committed against women.

Justice G Jayachandran also laid down suggestions which the trial courts could look into while dealing with applications for plea bargaining.

The court suggested that the trial courts could inform the accused about his right to invoke plea bargaining soon after the framing charges, thus allowing the accused to exercise his right before the expiry of 30 days from the date of framing charges as prescribed under Section 290 of BNSS.

Nullity Of Marriage Doesn't Bar Wife From Claiming Maintenance: Madras High Court

Case Title: Sathiyamurthy v Arputha Mary

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 320

While refusing to interfere with an order granting maintenance to the wife, the Madras High Court said that it was a settled position that even if a marriage was declared null by a competent court, it would not bar the wife from claiming maintenance.

Justice G Ilangovan was hearing a plea by a husband to recall an earlier order of the High Court fixing maintenance of Rs5000/- to his wife. The court observed that if the husband had any grievance over the order, he should have taken recourse through proper proceedings. The court, thus denied to interfere with the order stating that the petition filed without following the procedure was not maintainable.

Grindr App Used To Commit Offence: Madras High Court Asks Centre To Take Appropriate Action Against App Including Blocking

Case Title: Maharaja v Inspector of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 321

The Madras High Court recently observed that the popular gay dating app, Grindr was being used for illegal activities. The court was hearing a bail petition of a man who was accused of sexually abusing and robbing another man through the app. The court thus suggested the Investigating officer to report to the Ministry of Electronic & Information Technology so that it could take appropriate action including blocking the app as per with law.

Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy remarked that the app was illegal not because it dealt with homosexual persons, but it served only a prurient purpose and the sexual interest of the parties.

Commercial Tax Officer Not Obligated To Physically Verify E-Way Bills: Madras High Court

Case Title: S.Doctor Viswanathan Versus The State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 322

The Madras High Court has quashed the suspension order of a commercial tax officer who issued refunds to fake exporters without verification.

The bench of Justice N. Anand Venkatesh has observed that, as a quasi-judicial authority, if the petitioner has fulfilled all the requirements that are provided under the relevant Act and the circular, that by itself is sufficient compliance before passing the order of refund of the tax. If, for any reason, it ultimately turns out to be a fake export by a fraudster, the order passed by the petitioner by itself cannot result in the suspension of the petitioner. When the petitioner was exercising his quasi-judicial function, unless there was strong prima facie material against the petitioner involving moral turpitude, grave misconduct, etc., suspension must be the last resort.

No IGST Is Payable On Ocean Freight Under Reverse Charge Mechanism; Madras High Court Directs Refund

Case Title: Viterra India Pvt Ltd. Versus The Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 323

The Madras High Court has directed the department to refund the GST paid by the assessee on the ocean freight under the reverse charge mechanism.

The bench of Justice Mohammed Shaffiq has relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mohit Minerals Private Limited, in which it was held that no IGST is payable on ocean freight under the reverse charge mechanism for cost, insurance, and freight (CIF) imports.

Madras High Court Permits Hindu Munnani To Hold Peaceful Demonstrations In Solidarity With Hindus In Bangladesh

Case Title: Siva Vijayan v Home Secretary and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 324

The Madras High Court has allowed Hindu Munnani to conduct demonstrations in the state demanding the Central Government to take action against the genocide of Hindus in Bangladesh.

Allowing a petition filed by the organization, Justice G Jayachandran said that when demonstrations could be held in the state to show solidarity with the Tamils in Sri Lanka, the same could be done for the Hindus in Bangladesh. The court also emphasized that the people had a democratic right to hold peaceful demonstrations.

Madras HC Quashes POCSO Case Against Woman Who Alleged Mother & Sister Illegaly Retained Her Daughter's Custody, Orders Child To Be Returned

Case Title: Dharani v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 325

In an unusual order, the Madras High Court has invoked its extraordinary jurisdiction in a habeas corpus case, to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against a woman under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

The bench of Justice MS Ramesh and Justice Sunder Mohan were hearing an HCP filed by a woman for producing her 5-and-a-half-year-old daughter. The woman had alleged that her elder sister and mother were refusing to hand over the daughter's custody to her.

After granting custody to the woman, the court went a step further and examined the POCSO proceedings initiated against her on the complaint of the sister and the mother. Noting that a scheming attempt had been made by the sister and mother to get custody of the minor child, the court observed that there was not an iota of legally permissible evidence against the woman to proceed under the POCSO Act.

Madras High Court Quashes Proceedings Against Woman Who Killed Husband For Trying To Sexually Assault Daughter

Case Title: Preetha v Inspector of Police and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 326

The Madrasa High Court recently quashed a criminal case registered against a woman for allegedly killing her husband who tried to sexually assault their 21-year-old daughter in a drunken state.

Justice G Jayachandran noted that on perusing the materials, it was clear that the act was committed under private defence and it was obvious that the woman had committed the alleged offence to save the honour of her daughter.

The court referred to the statement of the daughter along with the photographs and the post-mortem report to conclude that the prosecution under Section 302 of the IPC was erroneous. The court observed that the act was a clear case of private defence which attracted Section 97 of the IPC.

Appointments To Aided Minority Institutions Can't Be Restricted To Any Particular Caste Or Religion: Madras High Court

Case Title: Manohar Thangaraj v Rt.Rev.ARGST Barnabas and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 327

The Madras High Court recently held that while minorities have the right to establish and administer educational institutions, the appointment in these institutions if aided by the government, could not be limited to a particular religious denomination.

Justice GR Swaminathan observed that when the institution was receiving funds from the state exchequer, the principles of secularism demanded that the appointment process be open to all.

The court observed that the right of the institutions to receive grant from the government is coupled with the obligation to appoint competent teachers and this obligation could be discharged only if there is a wide choice of candidates. The court thus held that the appointment of candidates from the diocese list would not be good for the administration.

Retrospective Applicability Of Extended Time Limit For Availing ITC; Madras High Court Quashes Order Not Condoning 1 Day Delay

Case Title: M/s. Ohm Sakthi Blue Metals Versus The Superintendent of GST & Central Excise

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 328

The Madras High Court has quashed the order, not condoning the delay of 1 day, on the ground that the extended time limit for availing input tax credit (ITC) is retrospectively applicable.

The bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy has observed that the GST Council, in its 53rd meeting, recommended extending the deadline for filing GSTR-3B returns for the financial years 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, and 2020-21, and the said extension applies retrospectively from July 1, 2017.

The court, while allowing the petition, held that the department refused to condone the delay and also proposed to reverse the ITC under Section 73(1) of the GST Act, which is detrimental to the interest of the petitioner and is hence liable to be set aside.

Delay In Filing Appeal, Notices Uploaded On GST Portal , Copy Not Served: Madras High Court Condones Delay

Case Title: Tvl.Deepa Traders Versus The Deputy Commissioner (ST)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 329

The Madras High Court has condoned the delay of 285 days in filing the appeal on the grounds that the notices were uploaded on the GST portal but no hard copy was served on the assessee.

The bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy has observed that the delay was not wilful but due to bona fide reasons, and a reasonable cause has been shown by the petitioner for the delay.

“Atrocious Game By State”: Madras High Court Imposes Rs 5 Lakh Cost On State For Filing Frivolous Appeals Over Salary Dispute

Case Title: The State of Tamil Nadu v. SG Pushpalatha Gracelin and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 330

The Madras High Court recently imposed a cost of Rs.5 lakh on the State of Tamil Nadu for filing appeals against orders directing it to pay salaries to Assistant Professors.

While ordering the exemplary costs, the bench of Justice R Subramanian and Justice L Victoria Gowri said it hoped the order would serve as an example and prevent the State from filing such appeals. The court also called the petitions an “atrocious game” played by the State on its citizens.

The State had appealed against a 2023 order of a single judge directing it to pay the pending salary of Assistant Professors. The court observed that it did not find any reason to interfere with the order of the single judge. The court thus dismissed the appeals with exemplary costs. Out of the costs, the court ordered half the amount to be paid to the CANCARE Foundation.

Leave From Employment For Research Abroad Should Not Be Treated As Break In Service, Must Be Counted For Pension Purposes: Madras High Court

Case Title: R Rakkiyappan v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 331

The Madras High Court recently observed that as per the Tamil Nadu Leave Rules 1933, the period of absence from work for employment abroad shall not be treated as a break in service and must be counted for pension and other purposes.

Justice Anand Venkatesh noted that even as per a Government Order issued in this regard, the period of absence during employment abroad should be treated as an extraordinary leave and should not be considered a break in service but one without allowance.

The court was hearing a petition filed by Rakkiyappan who had approached the court after his leave period was not counted for pension, other terminal benefits, annual benefits and for Carrier Advancement Scheme (CAS).

“Temple Prasad Key Element Of Worship”: Madras High Court Asks HR&CE Dept To Consider Preparing Prasadam On Its Own Without Commercialising

Case Title: CS Vaidyanathan v The Commissioner, HR & CE Department

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 332

The Madras High Court recently observed that temple prasadam is a key element in worship which gives immense satisfaction to the devotees and thus the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment department should consider preparing and distributing the prasadam on its own without leasing it to commercial operators or other individuals.

Justice B Pugalendhi also remarked that the Prasadam is a blessing of the deity and it is the duty of the temple administration to ensure the quality of the Prasadam provided in the temple. The court thus wondered how the department would ensure the quality of the Prasadam when its production and supply were leased out to private individuals.

Noting that temple was not a place for commercial activities, the court examined the income generated by leasing out the Prasadam stalls to private individuals and the income generated when the Prasadam is prepared and provided by the temple itself. The court noted that temples could generate higher income through Prasadam stalls by preparing it in the temple itself.

Madras High Court Declines To Stall Formula 4 Street Race To Be Held In Chennai From August 31st To September 1st

Case Title: ANS Prasad v The Secretary and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 333

The Madras High Court on Thursday refused to stall the Formula 4 Street Race that is scheduled to be held in Chennai on August 31^st and September 1^st, 2024.

The division bench of Acting Chief Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice PB Balaji allowed the race to be conducted subject to obtaining a license from the Federation Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA) which was to be obtained on or before noon on 31st August. The court also made it clear that if the license was not obtained within the stipulated time, the event could not be conducted.

The bench passed the interim orders after considering the affidavit filed by the Chennai City Traffic Police assuring that the free flow of traffic would not be affected and that there wouldn't be any hindrance in accessing the Government Hospital. The court had previously dismissed a batch of pleas challenging the conduct of the Formula 4 race in 2023. The event was however postponed following Cyclone Michaung which hit Tamil Nadu in December 2023.

Administrative Delays Insufficient To Justify 950-Day Delay In Section 34 Appeal Under Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996: Madras High Court

Case Title: The Project Director, National Highways Vs. R.KaThe Project Director, National Highways No.45E & 220, National Highways Authority of India vs M.Mallika Begam and anr

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 334

The Madras High Court bench of Justice Sunder Mohan has held that the administrative reason alone cannot be a reason for condoning the delay of 950 days in filing an appeal under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The bench held that delays attributable to administrative factors, such as changes in project management or internal procedural adjustments, do not constitute valid grounds for extending the limitation period for filing an appeal.

Brought Disrepute To Legal Profession: Madras High Court Calls For Action Against Lawyer Who Forged Rental Documents

Case Title: BL Madhavan v The Secretary and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 335

The Madras High Court has called for action against a lawyer who misused his position and forged rental agreements. The court observed that the lawyer was liable to be prosecuted for misconduct under the Advocates Act 1961 and the Bar Council of India Rules 1975.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam held that lawyers enjoy a status in society and are expected to maintain good conduct. In the present case, the court noted that the lawyer had abused his position which would cause disrepute to the legal profession.

Muslim Wife Who Files For Divorce Is Entitled To Claim Interim Maintenance U/S 151 CPC: Madras High Court

Case Title: ABC v XYZ

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 336

The Madras High Court has ordered that courts have power under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure to grant interim maintenance to a Muslim woman who has filed for divorce under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act 1939.

Justice V Lakshminarayanan noted that though the Act does not have a provision for granting interim maintenance, the court cannot shut its eyes when the wife comes to the court saying that she has no means. The court added that the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act was introduced to ameliorate the status of Muslim women and thus had to be given a purposive interpretation.

Senthil Balaji Withdraws Revision Plea Against Trial Court's Refusal To Discharge Him From PMLA Proceedings

Case Title: V Senthil Balaji v Deputy Director

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 337

Former Tamil Nadu Minister Senthil Balaji who has been in ED custody since June 2023 in connection with a cash-for-job money laundering case has withdrawn a revision petition filed by him challenging the decision of the Special Judge refusing to discharge him from the proceedings.

Balaji's counsel told the bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam that since the trial in the PMLA case has already begun and the witness examination has already started, he wished to withdraw the revision petition. The court noted the submission and dismissed the case as withdrawn.

Sexual Harassment In Sports: Madras High Court Directs State To Take Measures To Protect Athletes, Take Prompt Action Against Perpetrators

Case Title: Tamil Selvan v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 338

While refusing to set aside the conviction of a sports teacher who was convicted for harassing a 12^th Standard student during a State-level match, the Madras High Court remarked that the right to enjoy a safe and supportive sports environment is a fundamental right of every female sports person.

Justice KK Ramakrishnan noted that as per a report published by the Ungender titled 'Sexual Harassment in Sports in India', sexual harassment was at an all-time high. The court noted that perpetrators of such crimes had to be suitably dealt with. Noting that a prompt law to deal with such issues was required, the court issued directions to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu to address the issue of protection of women participants in sports from sexual harassment in the interest of sports education and transparent participation of women in sports.

The court also directed the State Government to permit either parents or guardians of the girl participating in state competition to accompany them at state cost to prevent harassment.

Madras High Court Quashes Proceedings Against Union Minister Shobha Karandlaje After State Govt Accepts Her Apology

Case Title: Shobha Karandlaje v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 339

The Madras High Court on Thursday quashed the FIR registered against Union Minister Shobha Karandlaje for her remarks linking Rameshwaram Café bombers to the people of Tamil Nadu.

Justice G Jayachandran allowed Karandlaje's petition after Advocate General PS Raman informed the court that considering Karandlaje's profound apology, the state has taken a policy decision to not pursue the matter further.

Ordinary Leave For Prisoners: Courts Shouldn't Entertain Premature Pleas, Must Allow Competent Authority To Exercise Power: Madras High Court

Case Title: Usha v The Director General of Police and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 340

The Madras High Court has remarked against High Courts entertaining premature petitions for ordinary leave of prisoners. The court noted that the competent authorities must be allowed to take a decision by following due procedure as per the statutory time limit provided under the Act.

Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice N Senthilkumar also observed that the authorities were duty-bound to follow the time limits stipulated in the rules and process the applications for ordinary leave. The court added that any lapse, on the part of the authorities, must be viewed as a dereliction of duty and disciplinary action should be initiated against the concerned officer. The court stressed that the prison authorities should protect the rights of the prisoners.

Ruling Party Cannot Assume That Any Expression Or Opinion About Govt's Functioning Amounts To Promoting Enmity: Madras High Court

Case Title: Thirumurugan v The State and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 341

The Madras High Court recently observed that whenever opinions are expressed about the functioning of the Government, the members of the ruling party could not assume that the same would amount to promoting enmity.

Justice G Jayachandran added that the police should be responsible while registering FIR in such cases and must proceed with registering FIR only upon getting a proper legal opinion.

Madras High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To NTK Functionary, Says 'Virtual Warriors' Must Be Careful Before Responding Online

Case Title: Durai Murugan @ Sattai Durai Murugan v The Inspector of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 342

The Madras High Court recently granted anticipatory bail to Naam Tamilar Katchi functionary Durai Murugan @ Sattai Durai Murugan. Murugan had approached the court apprehending arrest in a crime booked after his party members made objectionable comments on a post made by a police officer criticising Murugan's speech.

Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy was inclined to grant anticipatory bail as Murgan had not personally made any comments. Thus, the court granted him bail on some conditions. It however criticised the remarks made by Murugan's party men calling it unparliamentary, sexually coloured and vilifying. The court added that before responding online, people should be cautious and ask themselves if the response was necessary.

Tax Concession Can't Be Denied Based On Vehicle Registered In The Name Of Trust And Not School: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s. Bala Bhavan Educational Trust v. Regional Transport Officer

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 343

The Madras High Court stated that the Tax Concession cannot be denied just because the vehicle is registered in the name of Trust and not school.

The Bench consists of Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan observed that “the Regional Transport Officer, Chennai failed to see the objects of the assessee/petitioner Trust, it is an educational Trust. That apart, the Regional Transport Officer made demand with retrospective effect. The permits of the assessee/petitioner buses were already renewed under the caption of Educational Institution Bus.”

Will Remove Unauthorised 'No Parking' Signs Put Up By Private Building Owners In Public Roads: TN Govt Informs Madras High Court

Case Title: CS Nandhakumar v The Commissioner of Police (Traffic Wing) and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 344

The Tamil Nadu government has informed the Madras High Court that it would take action to remove all unauthorized and illegal no-parking signs, mud bags, and no parking barricades put up by private building owners in public roads.

The submissions were made before a bench of Acting Chief Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice PB Balaji while dealing with a Public Interest Litigation seeking government action to remove such illegal sign boards. The petitioner had also sought for publications through print and visual media to remove the encroachments.

The AAG assured the court that necessary instructions would be issued by the Commissioner to the officials concerned for issuing necessary guidelines and directions in the official website within two weeks.

The court then asked the AAG to also indicate in the guidelines that penal consequences would be taken against those occupying public places without any authority. Recording the State's submission, the court disposed the plea.

Red Tapism Must Be Combated: Madras High Court Asks State To Create Centralised Portal For Applying, Issuing Community Certificates

Case Title: V Mahalakshmi v The Secretary and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 345

The Madras High Court has asked the State Government to create a common centralized portal for applying for community certificates, verifying the communal status, and issuing community certificates. The court observed that there was a need for simplifying the whole process so that citizens have easy access to the facilities.

The bench of Acting Chief Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice PB Balaji observed that through the centralized system, an applicant should be able to apply to the authority concerned in the district he/she resides in without relegating to the native district. The court added that the system could also introduce a provision enabling the authorities to verify the communal status of the applicant based on their family's communal status who resides in the district even if the applicant is not living in that district.

The court added that a time limit should also be fixed to conclude the entire procedure so that no unnecessary delay is caused and the applicant is able to be given access to educational and employment opportunities.

“Unpardonable, Inexcusable”: Madras HC Imposes ₹50K Cost On State For Appealing Against Compensation For Death Of Child In Sri Lankan Refugee Camp

Case Title: The Principal Secretary v Athipathi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 346

The Madras High Court recently dismissed an appeal filed by the State of Tamil Nadu against an order directing the state to pay Rs 5,00,000 as compensation to the family of a child who died in the Srilankan Refugee camp.

Calling the state action “unpardonable and inexcusable”, the bench of Justice R Subramanian and Justice Victoria Gowri dismissed the appeal and imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000 on the state to be paid to the victim child's family within two weeks.

The court also remarked that when the state government could pay Rs. 10,00,000 as compensation to the dependants of persons who died by consuming illicit liquor, they should not have challenged the order to pay compensation of Rs. 5,00,000 for the child who died due to the collapse of a poorly constructed and poorly maintained wall.

Madras High Court Sets Aside Order Passed Against A Dead Person

Case Title: M/s. S. R. Steels v. The Deputy State Tax Officer

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 347

The Madras High Court sets aside an order passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer against a dead person.

The Bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that “the impugned order was passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer/respondent against a dead person, who was passed away on 21.11.2019. In such case, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.”

The bench stated that it appears that the impugned order dated 07.02.2024 was passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer against a dead person, who was passed away on 21.11.2019. In such case, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

Further, since the assessee/petitioner is the only legal heir of the deceased, it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to the assessee to establish his case on merits, added the bench.

[PMLA] Quashing FIR On Technical Grounds In Predicate Offence Would Not Lead To Automatic Quashing Of ECIR: Madras High Court

Case Title: Vijayraj Surana v Assistant Director

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 348

The Madras High Court has ruled that when an FIR in the predicate offense is quashed on technical grounds, it will not lead to an automatic quashing of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR).

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam ruled that the judgments in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary cannot have a blanket application and shall be applied depending on the facts of each case. The court observed that when the FIR is quashed on mere technicalities or procedural irregularities, the ECIR would not be automatically quashed.

The court observed that when the courts are dealing with applications to quash the ECIR, it should look into the grounds on which the FIR concerning the scheduled offense is quashed and after careful examination, if it is found that the FIR was quashed on substantive grounds such as absence of prima facie offense, the ECIR would also lose its significance and could be quashed. The court added that if, on careful examination, the court finds that the FIR was quashed purely on technical grounds or procedural irregularities, then the PMLA proceedings would not end.

Police Cannot Order Freezing Of Bank Account Without Quantifying Amount Involved In Financial Fraud, Violates Right To Trade: Madras HC

Case Title: Mohammed Saifullah v Reserve Bank of India and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 349

The Madras High Court has recently ruled that the investigating agency cannot order freezing the entire bank account of a person involved in a financial fraud without quantifying the amount involved in the fraud.

Justice G Jayachandran ruled that such orders freezing the entire amount would be construed as a violation of the fundamental right of trade and business as well as a violation of livelihood. The court added that though the statute empowers investigation agencies to request banks to freeze accounts, it was a looming question whether this power was being exercised properly.

The court added that the freezing of accounts was an issue faced by many citizens of the country and the citizens were often taken by surprise by orders of freezing their accounts. The court added that in many cases, by the time the account holders come to know of the purpose for which their accounts are frozen, enough damage would have been caused to their financial life since their business itself gets affected by the unilateral orders.

[MSMED Act] Statutory Authority Can Only Entertain Dispute If Supplier Was Registered Under The Act During Relevant Period: Madras HC

Case Title: Swiss Garniers Genexiaa Sciences Pvt Ltd v. Avant Garde Healthcare and Engg Solutions Pvt Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 350

The Madras High Court recently ruled that the statutory authority under the Micro, Small, Medium, Enterprises Development Act, 2006 would have jurisdiction to entertain disputes only when the supplier had been registered under the Act at the relevant point of time.

Justice K Kumaresh Babu thus allowed an application filed by Swiss Garniers Genexiaa Sciences Pvt Ltd to waive off the requirement to pay 75% pre-deposit amount under Section 19 of the Act.

PMLA Accused Need Not Be Produced Before Special Court Within 24 HoursIf Arrested From Judicial Custody: Madras High Court

Case Title: Jaffer Sadiq v The Assistant Director

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 351

The Madras High Court recently dismissed the petition filed by former DMK functionary Jaffer Sadiq challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate in connection with a PMLA case.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam noted that requirements under the Act had been met when Sadiq, who was already in judicial custody, was formally arrested. Thus, the court said that the petition was devoid of merits and dismissed the same.

Madras High Court Directs Tamil Nadu Veterinary And Animal Sciences University To Not Reject Candidate's Application For Being Transgender

Case Title: A.Nivetha v The Secretary to Government and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 352

The Madras High Court has recently directed the Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University not to reject a candidate's application on the grounds of being transgender.

Justice M Dhandapani was hearing a petition filed by A Nivetha challenging the prospectus issued by the University for admission to undergraduate degree programs. Nivetha had sought to quash the prospectus as being illegal as it did not categorize transgenders as a special category.

Nivetha had applied for the course of Bachelor of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry on June 26, 2024 which was received by the university. However, on noting that the admission notification issued by the University had no clauses regarding the admission of transgender persons, Nivetha approached the High Court.

Letter Given To Police Officer Admitting Guilt Hit by Section 25 Of Evidence Act, Not Admissible As Evidence: Madras High Court

Case Title: R Lalithsharma v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 353

The Madras High Court has recently set aside an order of the XV Metropolitan Magistrate, which had allowed a petition filed by the prosecution to receive two documents as additional documents, one of which was a letter admitting guilt given to the police.

Justice Nirmal Kumar noted that any letter given to a police officer admitting guilt is hit by Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act. The court observed that in the present case, though it was said by the prosecution, it appeared that the letters were brought in only to fill up the lacuna in the prosecution, which could not be allowed.

Money Laundering Includes Every Activity Dealing With Proceeds Of Crime,Not Limited To Final Act Of Integrating Money Into Economy: Madras HC

Case Title: Pallab Sinha and another v The Deputy Director

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 354

The Madras High Court recently observed that Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act had wider reach and that money laundering would include any activity or process of dealing with proceeds of crime, either directly or indirectly. The court made it clear that the offence was not limited to the final act of integrating tainted money into the economy.

Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam noted that the wording of Section 3 should not be read conjunctively merely because the definition uses the word 'and'. The court added that if such an interpretation was accepted, the whole Section would be rendered less effective as one person would possess the proceeds of crime and another would project it as tainted money so that neither would be covered under the Act. The court thus observed that PMLA could be invoked against a person, who was no longer in possession and enjoyment of proceeds of crime.

Appeal Can't Be Rejected For Failure To Upload Documents On GST Portal Due To Technical Errors: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s Shivpad Engineers Pvt. Ltd. v. The Deputy Commissioner

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 355

The Madras High Court stated that an appeal cannot be rejected solely due to the failure to upload documents on the GST portal if the delay or failure is due to technical errors on the portal.

The Bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that “….an appeal should not be rejected without affording the parties an opportunity to be heard, particularly when the rejection arises from technical issues beyond their control.”

No Clinching Material To Show Exact Birth Date Of Thiruvalluvar: Madras High Court Declines To Interfere With Govt Holiday

Case Title: Prof. Dr.Samy Thiyagarajan v The Chief Secretary and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 356

The Madras High Court has dismissed a plea challenging the policy of the Government of Tamil Nadu celebrating the birthday of Thiruvalluvar on the 2nd day of Thai which was also declared a public holiday. The petitioner had sought to celebrate Thiruvalluvar's birthday on the Tamil star “Anusham” in the Tamil Month of “Vaikasi”.

Justice M Dhandapani said that since there was no evidence to know the exact birth date of Thiruvalluvar, the court could not issue such directions to the State.

The court agreed with the State's submission that the government policy was only to celebrate Thiruvalluvar and his greatness and nowhere the State mentioned that the day was to be celebrated as the birthday of Thiruvalluvar.

In Absence Of Defendant's Written Request, Trial Courts Cannot On Its Own Extend Time For Filing Written Statement After 30 Days: Madras High Court

Case Title: Ramesh Flowers Private Limited v. Mr.Sumit Srimal

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 357

The Madras High Court has observed that the trial courts should not, on its own, extend the time for filing written statements after the expiry of 30 days. The court said that the courts could extend the time only at the request of the defendant which was made in writing containing reasons. The court added that condoning delay on its own would be contrary to Order 8 Rule 1 of CPC

Justice GR Swaminathan also noted that the orders condoning delay for filing written statements should not be passed mechanically and must contain the reasons. The court added that while condoning delay was discretionary, it was mandatory for the courts to record reasons in the order. The court also said that the trial courts could consider awarding costs while condoning the delay.

Madras High Court Junks Plea Seeking Special Benches For Hearing Cases Against Public Spirited Persons, Journalists & Youtubers

Case Title: S.Muralidharan v Madras High Court and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 358

The Madras High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation seeking the constitution of special benches for hearing cases related to public-spirited persons, journalists, and YouTubers.

The bench of Acting Chief Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice PB Balaji said that no person had a right to invoke the court's jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a direction to constitute a special bench. The court added that the petitioner's grievance could not be redressed by way of a public interest litigation.

The court also observed that various factors had to be considered before establishing a separate bench to deal with particular types of cases. The court noted that while the petitioner sought for a special bench, he had not argued that there was a huge backlog of cases against public-spirited individuals, journalists, or Youtubers and had neither placed any evidence pointing to the pendency of the cases.

Transfer Incidental In Employment: Madras HC Dismisses Plea Challenging TANGEDCO's Orders Transferring Employees To TN Green Energy Corp

Case Title: TNEB Accounts and Executive Staff Union v. The Principal Secretary to Government and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 359

The Madras High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB) Accounts and Executive Staff Union challenging an order of the Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd (TANGEDCO) through which company employees were transferred to the newly formed Tamil Nadu Power Generation Corporation Ltd (TNPGCL) and Tamil Nadu Green Energy Corporation Limited (TNGECL).

Justice N Senthilkumar noted that the transfer was made pursuant to a tripartite agreement entered into between the State Government, TNEB, TANTRANSO, TANGEDCO, and the trade unions. The court thus ruled that the trade unions could not challenge the transfer when they were already a part of the tripartite agreement. The court also noted transfer was an incidental part of employment and even assuming that some employees had difficulty with the transfer, it could not be a ground to challenge the transfers.

India Must Honour Bilateral Agreements With US: Madras HC Denies Clearance Certificate To Man Who Supplied Helicopters To Iraq Despite US Sanction

Case Title: Hameed Ibrahim v The Deputy Director

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 360

The Madras High Court recently refused to grant a clearance certificate to a man against whom PMLA proceedings were initiated based on a letter from the US Government.

Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam noted that the Enforcement Directorate had initiated an investigation based on a letter issued by the US Government and the Government of India had to honour the bilateral treaties/agreements with the US Government.

Presumption U/S 90 Of Evidence Act Applies When Will Which Is Over 30 Yrs Old Is Produced From Proper Custody: Madras High Court

Case Title: Marathal (Died) and Another v. Kanniammal (Died) and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 361

The Madras High Court recently observed that when a Will, which is more than 30 years old, is produced from proper custody, the presumption under Section 90 of the Indian Evidence Act would be applicable to such will.

Justice V Lakshminarayanan observed that the Section did not exclude a will. The court added that by the very texture of Section 90, the document that requires execution and attestation like a will is presumed to be duly executed and attested if it is more than 30 years old and produced from proper custody.

The court added that if the will is more than 30 years old and produced from proper custody and it is shown that the attesting witnesses are alive and not produced before the court, it may resort to the presumption under Section 114 illustration (g) instead of one under Section 90. The court added that the presumption under Section 90 or under Section 114 illustration (g) should be guided by the principle governing “may presume” under Section 4 of the Indian Evidence Act.

The court also made it clear that the presumption under Section 90 is not wide and is limited to the signature, execution, and attestation of the document. The court added that the presumption does not apply to the contents of the document which would have to be proved like other facts.

'Can't Have Another Trial Before The Registry': Madras HC Directs Family Court To Number Wife's Plea Without Asking For Evidence That Couple Are Hindus

Case Title: R.Gnana Sundari v T.Yesuraj

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 362

The Madras High Court has directed the Family Court in Chennai to number a petition filed by a wife for restitution of conjugal rights without insisting on evidence that she and her husband are Hindus.

Justice V Lakshminarayanan noted that though the husband had filed a divorce petition claiming that the couples were Christians while the wife had filed the petition for restitution of conjugal rights claiming that the couple were Hindus, the issue had to be decided by the court at the time of disposal. The court added that if proof is demanded at the time of numbering, it would lead to a trial before the registry and another trial before the court which could not be allowed.

Wife Threatening To Commit Suicide, Filing False Dowry Harassment Case Would Amount To Mental Cruelty: Madras High Court

Case Title: ABC v XYZ

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 363

Granting divorce to a husband, the Madras High Court recently observed that a wife threatening to commit suicide would amount to cruelty.

Justice S Srimathy noted that in the case, the husband had written letters to his mother, within 8 months of marriage indicating his agony wherein he had stated that the wife was threatening to commit suicide. The court noted that there was an element of mental cruelty present in the case.

The court also noted that the wife had filed false dowry harassment case against the husband and his family which had tarnished the family's image. The court thus noted that the wife had used the false dowry harassment case as a tool to threaten the husband which amounted to cruelty.

'Animals Don't Have Rights But State Instrumentalities Must Ensure Safe Environment': Madras HC Orders Compensation For Cow's Death By Electrocution

Case Title: T.Muthu Irulappa v The State and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 364

The Madras High Court has ordered compensation to a man whose cow died to electrocution after it stepped into a puddle into which electricity had leaked from a nearby transformer.

Justice GR Swaminathan noted that though animals did not have any rights as such, the State had a duty to ensure a safe environment for them. The judge added that courts have a duty to invoke parens patriae jurisdiction to take care of the rights of animals since they were unable to take care of themselves.

The court noted that of late, the natural life span of cows was also cut short due to the consumption of plastic. The court noted that death due to consumption of plastic was different as in such cases, death came gradually and insidiously accompanied by severe pain. The court also noted that the law relating to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals was silent on this aspect and time had come to take note of the disturbing reality and remedy the solution. The court said that the municipalities and corporations had a duty to keep the streets litter-free and action should be taken for damages against erring entities.

If DNA Test Reveals Husband Is Not Child's Father, He Need Not Implead Wife's Paramour In Proceedings Under Indian Divorce Act: Madras HC

Case Title: ABC v XYZ

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 365

The Madras High court recently observed that not impleading wife's alleged paramour as a co-respondent is not fatal to a plea for divorce on the ground of adultery, when the DNA test already proves that the husband is not the father of the child.

Justice P Velmurugan and Justice KK Ramakrishnan observed that once it is proved that the wife was leading an adulterous life, the husband would be entitled to divorce on that ground.

The court noted that the medical evidence and the expert advice clearly showed that the child was not born to the husband. The court also noted that the wife had not disputed the DNA test or the expert report on the DNA test. Thus, the court noted that even though there was no direct evidence, the expert advise would indicate that the wife had illegal intimacy with another man.

Despite Tamil Nadu Being A Better Law Enforcing State, There's An Increasing Trend Of Police Encounters: Madras High Court

Case Title: A. Guruvammal v The Commissioner of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 366

The Madras High Court today lamented the rising trend of police encounters in the state of Tamil Nadu. The court observed that despite being one of the better law enforcement State, there was an increase in incidents of criminals allegedly attempting to attack police officials and ending up being shot or injured.

Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy noted that oftentimes, the family, who might have been affected by the criminals would applaud the encounter killings without realizing that the same is fundamentally wrong and retrograde thinking.

The court noted that the issue of appreciation for encounter killings had to be taken seriously as the same points to a lack of faith in the law enforcing agencies in the rule of law, constitutional rights and protection, and the criminal justice system. The court further noted that such an attitude reminisces the colonial past of the police and is an affront to democracy.

The court added that people's belief that instant death is an appropriate punishment that would have a deterrent effect is not true and was only a myth. The court emphasized that the means should be as legal as the end.

Madras High Court Stays Single Judge Order Which Held Apartment Owners Association Cannot Claim Transfer Fee On Every Resale Of Flat

Case Title: Ankur Grand Owners Association v The District Registrar (Admin)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 367

The Madras High Court has stayed the order of a single judge which had ruled that the flat owners could not charge a transfer fee on every resale of the flat.

The bench of Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice PB Balaji have stayed by 8 weeks the order passed by the single judge. The stay was granted on an appeal filed by the Ankur Grand Owners Association challenging the May 2023 decision of Justice SM Subramaniam.

The single judge had observed that if the association was permitted to collect a transfer fee on every resale of a flat, it would not only result in discrimination but also result in multiple collections of corpus funds on every resale or transfer of property. The court had ruled that in the absence of any statutory provision, the association could not be allowed to levy and collect transfer fees on the purchase of pre-owned flats.

UGC Regulation On Selection Committee For Appointment Of Assistant Professor Not Applicable To Minority Institutions: Madras High Court

Case Title: The Principal & Secretary v The State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 368

The Madras High Court recently held that the UGC regulations prescribing setting up of a selection committee for the appointment of assistant professor was not applicable to minority institutions.

Justice RN Manjula noted that since the selection committee includes outsiders, giving them the power to select the appointees for the post of Assistant Professors would amount to interfering with the administration of the minority institution. The court added that the administration of the affairs of the institution cannot be given in the hands of outsiders.

The court also observed that mandating the UGC regulation of selection committees to these institutions would interfere with their autonomous status. The court thus noted that the selection of faculties in minority institutions could not be compelled to be made through the selection committee contemplated in the UGC regulations.

State Shouldn't Reject Premature Release Of Convict By Merely Citing "Heinous Crime", Must Give Reasons: Madras High Court

Case Title: Mr.Mani @ Velumani v The State and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 369

The Madras High Court recently asked the State government to reconsider and recirculate its decision to reject a life convict's pre-mature release.

Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam noted that the State had rejected the request of the prisoner by merely stating that he had committed a heinous crime and that he had not served 14 years in prison. Noting that reasons were the lifeline for administrative decisions, the court observed that the government should assign proper reasons in each and every case.

The court observed that under Article 226 of the Constitution, though the court could not test the policy of the State government, the court had to see if the State had exercised its power of discretion in compliance with the rules of natural justice.

Article 21 Extends To Foreign Citizen Facing Trial In India: Madras HC Stays Look Out Circular Against Seychelles Citizen, Permits His Travel

Case Title: Karthik Parthiban v The Superintendent of Police and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 370

The Madras High Court recently stayed a lookout circular issued by the Central Bureau of Investigation against a Seychelles citizen. The court thus permitted the man to travel to Malaysia.

Justice N Seshasayee noted that when Article 21 of the Constitution extended to non-citizens, it would also include the dignified existence of a foreign national facing a criminal charge in India.

The court also opined that the object of the criminal justice system was only to secure the presence of the accused at the trial and it should not be taken as a license to interfere with the personal life of the accused. The court remarked that the criminal justice system was best administered when the inconvenience to the personal life of the accused was the least.

Madras High Court Gives Nod To RSS Route March Proposed For Sunday, Says State Flouted Order Laying Down Guidelines For Future Marches

Case Title: K Sethuraj v State of Tamil Nadu (and other connected cases)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 371

The Madras High Court on Tuesday permitted the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) to conduct its proposed route march on the occasion of Vijayadasami.

A single judge bench of Justice G Jayachandran permitted the route marches to be carried out as per the earlier guidelines issued by the High Court in January this year for conducting the route marches. The court had also commented that despite detailed guidelines of the court previously, the government had flouted the orders forcing the organisers to approach the court again.

The court also orally remarked that the police were expected to protect the public as well as the organisers and could not avoid giving permissions for such permissions for route marches citing law and order problems. The court said that it expected the police in the state to follow the court orders at least in the future and not trouble the court by inventing new and fanciful reasons for rejection.

Madras HC Orders CBI Probe Into Sexual Abuse Of Minor After Her Parents Allegedly Beaten Up By Police, Audio Clip Of Victim's Statement Leaked

Case Title: Suo Motu v The Deputy Commissioner of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 372

The Madras High Court has ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation to take up the investigation of a case relating to the sexual assault of a minor girl in Anna Nagar in Chennai.

Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam asked the CBI to take over the case as the court was not satisfied with the manner in which the investigation was being carried out by the State police. The court noted that the victim's examination was conducted in the busy corridors of the Kilpauk Government Medical College and her parents were allegedly beaten up in the police station while the alleged accused was given a chair to sit.

The court also noted that the video and audio of the examination of the witness were publicized online and instead of finding the person who had shared the files in the first place, the police had merely registered FIRs against a Youtuber and a Journalist who had shared the files and who talked about the incident.

S.70 PMLA | Properties Purchased Prior To Scheduled Offence Can Be Attached Even If Not Purchased With Proceeds Of Crime: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s.Sterling Futures and Holidays Ltd. v Directorate of Enforcement,

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 373

The Madras High Court recently observed that under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the properties that are acquired even before the alleged scheduled offence could be attached when criminal activity has taken place outside the country. The court highlighted that the properties sought to be attached need not be purchased from and out of the proceeds of crime.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam also noted that as per Section 70 of the Act, a company could be prosecuted and the prosecution or conviction of the company, which is a legal jurisdictional person will not be dependent on the prosecution or conviction of any individual.

Tirupati Temple Laddu Case | Madras High Court Asks Licensing Authority To Issue Fresh Notice To Dairy Company, Give Reasonable Time To Respond

Case Title: AR Dairy Food Private Limited v The Central Licensing Authority – Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 374

The Madras High Court, on Thursday, directed the Central Licensing Authority – Tamil Nadu to issue a fresh notice to AR Dairy Food Private Limited on allegations of supplying adulterated ghee to the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam for making of laddu.

Justice N Sathish Kumar observed that the authority had issued the show cause notices for suspending the license merely on the basis of a report from a laboratory in Gujarat, without following the due provisions of the Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulation 2011. The court noted that the authority should have given a reasonable time to the company to respond to the show cause notice.

The court also noted that the impugned notice issued by the authority contained vague allegations and did not contain details of the specific violation committed by the dairy unit. The court reiterated the Supreme Court's remark to conduct an investigation by keeping God away from politics. The court thus asked the authority to issue a fresh notice to the company, containing details of the allegations and to give a reasonable time to the company to respond.

National Highways Dept Cannot Deny Payment Of Compensation Amount MerelyBased On Objection Due To Title Dispute: Madras High Court

Case Title: G Prem Kumar v District Collector

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 375

The Madras High Court recently directed the National Highways Department to disburse the compensation amount to a man who had a better title to the property but was not given compensation due to a title dispute.

Justice N Satish Kumar noted that the objection was made after a long time which showed an attempt to make inroads the property sold in 1972.

Notice of Assessment Issued Within Limitation, Assessment Order Valid Even If Passed Beyond Three-Year Period: Madras High Court

Case Title: The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT) Commercial Taxes Department v. M/s. Supreme Coaters & Fabricators

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 376

The Madras High Court stated that if notice for completing assessment issued within limitation, then assessment order is within time even if passed beyond period of three years.

The Division Bench of Justices R. Suresh Kumar and C. Saravanan observed that “as per Section 24(5), no assessment shall be made after a period of three years from the end of the year to which the return under the Act relates. The test to be applied is whether the notice for completing the assessment was issued within limitation i.e., three years to which the returns relate to. If so, even if the Assessment Order is passed beyond the period of three years, it will be in time.”

Person Whose Actions Provoke Speech Cannot Take Advantage Of Such Provocation And Prosecute Others For Their Reaction: Madras High Court

Case Title: V.Kannan @ Kanal Kannan v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 377

The Madras High Court recently quashed a criminal case registered against Kannan @ Kanal Kannan for his statements on the statue of Periyar containing statements against believers, being placed outside a Hindu Temple.

Justice G Jayachandran noted that the statue contained provocative words against believers which was the cause of Kannan's speech and thus the person who provoked the speech could not seek prosecution for a reaction to his own provocation.

The court noted that after uploading the speech on YouTube, there had been no disturbance to public peace or tranquility, no riot, or no promotion of enmity between classes. The court further observed that before installing the statue, the members of the Thanthai Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam, of which the defacto complainant was a member, should have realized that the plaque on the statue would hurt the sentiments of the believers.

“Benevolent Object”: Madras High Court Refuses To Interfere With Leasing Of 2.5 Acres Temple Land For Building College

Case Title: TR Ramesh v The Commissioner, HR & CE and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 378

The Madras High Court recently refused to quash an order leasing 2.50 acres of land belonging to Sri Somanathaswamy Temple in Kolathur to Sri Kapaliswarar Temple in Mylapore for 25 years to establish an Arts and Science College.

Justice M Dhandapani noted that on perusal, the impugned order appeared to be for a benevolent object. The court noted that it was not inclined to interfere at this stage when the petitioner had the option to raise his grievance before the appropriate authority. The court thus gave liberty to the petitioner to approach the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department with his objections/suggestions and directed the authorities to consider the same on merits.

Rule 55-A TN Registration Rules Has No Statutory Authority, Introduced Only To Enable Registrars To Refuse Registration Indiscriminately: Madras HC

Case Title: P Pappu v The Sub Registrar

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 379

The Madras High Court recently observed that Rule 55A of the Tamil Nadu Registration Rules, which gives powers to a Registrar to refuse registration had no statutory authority.

As per Rule 55A, The registering officer before whom a document relating to immovable property is presented for registration, shall not register the same, unless the presentant produces the previous original deed by which the executant acquired right over the subject property and an Encumbrance Certificate pertaining to the property obtained within ten days from the date of presentation.

Justice R Subramanian and Justice R Sakthivel observed that the Rule was introduced only to enable Registrars to refuse to register instruments indiscriminately. The court added that the Registrars were conferred certain powers under Section 68 of the Registration Act, and the power to issue any order needed to be consistent with the Act.

Mere Possession Of 'Proceeds Of Crime' Sufficient To Invoke PMLA, HC Cannot Restrict Its Meaning To Restrain Authorities: Madras High Court

Case Title: S.Srinivasan v The Assistant Director

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 380

The Madras High Court recently observed that the expression money laundering, as defined under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act has a wider meaning and the provisions of the Act could be invoked against a person for mere possession of proceeds of crime. The court added that since Section 3 is wider, the court could not restrict its meaning to restrain authorities from invoking the provisions of PMLA.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice AD Maria Clete noted that the expression money laundering ordinarily meant placing, layering and integrating tainted property in the formal economy, since the Section has wider reach it would capture every process and activity dealing with proceeds of crime, directly or indirectly and not limited to happening of the final act of integration.

Goods Shall Be Released Provisionally If Assessee Demonstrates Inclusion Of Transaction In GSTR-1 Return: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s. Aqua Excel v. The State Tax Officer (Adjudication), Office of Commercial Tax Officer, Tirunelveli.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 381

The Madras High Court stated that if the assessee is able to demonstrate that the transaction is included in the GSTR-1 Return, the goods shall be released provisionally.

The Bench of Justice Mohammed Shaffiq directed the assessee to submit a copy of the GSTR-1 report, as it would reveal whether the subject transaction was disclosed as a zero-rated sale.

Samsung India Workers Strike: Madras HC Closes Plea Against Arrest Of Workers After State Informs That They Have Been Let Off

Case Title: Muthukumar v State and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 382

The Madras High Court has closed a habeas corpus petition filed against the illegal arrest and detention of workers agitating at the Samsung India unit in Chennai.

The bench of Justice PB Balaji and Justice G Arul Murugan closed the plea after noting the submissions of the Additional Public Prosecutor who informed the court that the arrested persons had already been let off on October 8^th after the Sriperumbudur Judicial Magistrate refused to accept the remand.

Noting the submission of the APP that there was no illegal custody and that the persons had already been set at liberty, the court noted that no further orders were required in the habeas corpus plea. The court also noted that the necessary safeguards had already been put in place in an earlier order of the High Court laying down certain directions to be considered at the time of the strike.

Income Tax Assessee Who Failed To Avail Option To Request Personal Hearing Can't Claim That Personal Hearing Was Not Provided: Madras HC

Case Title: M.S. Mohamed Siddique & Co. v. The Assessment Unit/Verification unit/ Technical Unit/Review Unit Income Tax Department

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 383

The Madras High Court ruled that if an assessee does not take advantage of the opportunity to request a personal hearing from the department, they cannot later claim that they were denied a personal hearing.

The Bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that “……though the department has given liberty to the assessee to request for personal hearing, the assessee failed to avail such an option. Therefore, the question of violation of natural justice will not arise.”

The bench observed that after considering the reply, the assessment officer decided to take entire receipt as shown in the ITR as income of the assessee and decided to pass assessment order. On the other hand, the assessee filed the returns taking 28% as profit out of the total receipt in terms of Section 44A of the Act. When the (respondent) department rejected the reply of the assessee and decided to take entire receipt as income and proceeded to pass the assessment order, the department ought to have afforded an opportunity of personal hearing to the assessee.

Madras High Court Declines To Set Aside Show Cause Notice Issued To Musician Harris Jayaraj By GST Department

Case Title: Harris Jayaraj v The Joint Director and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 384

The Madras High Court has disposed of a petition filed by musician Harris Jayaraj challenging a show cause notice issued by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DCGI).

Justice R Suresh Kumar and Justice C Saravanan observed that a co-ordinate bench of the High Court had already ruled that show cause notices could not be challenged and the aggrieved persons could raise their objections before the adjudicating authority/assessing authority. The court thus held that the musician could raise his grounds and objections against the show cause notice before the adjudicating authority/ assessing authority/ revenue and the same could be decided on merits.

General Power Of Attorney Executed Jointly By More Than One Principal Doesn't Automatically Terminate On Death Of One Principal: Madras HC

Case Title: K.A.Meeran Mohideen v Sheik Amjad and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 385

The Madras High Court has ruled that when a general power of attorney is executed jointly by more than one principal, the death of one principal would not automatically terminate the agency.

Asnwering a reference, the bench of Justice R Subramanian and Justice R Sakthivel held that the question of termination would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case and would depend upon the intention of the parties at the time of execution of the power of attorney.

The court observed that if the intention was to continue the power even after death, the agency would continue will the object sought to be achieved is complete and if there was a specific interest in the agency, the agency would be terminated in respect of the principal who dies.

Penetration With Male Organ Not Necessary To Constitute Rape, Penetration Could Be With Any Body Part, Object Or Even An Attempt: Madras HC

Case Title: Abdul Gani Raja v The State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 386

The Madras High Court recently reiterated that to constitute an offence of rape, penetration using the male organ is not necessary and any penetration using any body part or object or even an attempt to penetrate or manipulate a body part could be considered under rape.

Justice K Murali Shankar observed that post the 2013 amendment to the criminal laws, the definition of rape had become broader. The court noted that while the pre-amendment definition mandated penetration with a male organ to constitute sexual intercourse, this main ingredient was removed by way of the amendment. The court added that the use of fingers, objects or any body part to penetrate or manipulate was sufficient to constitute the offence of rape.

Criminal Accusation Doesn't Imply One Should Surrender All Comforts To Participate In Trial: Madras HC Grants Relief To Octogenarian Accused

Case Title: Jacob v The State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 387

The Madras High Court recently came to the aid of an octogenarian with Parkinsons disease by directing Special Court for CBI cases to frame charges in a case against him through video conferencing, as per Section 355 of the BNSS.

Justice N Seshasayee observed that merely because a person was facing criminal accusations, it would not imply that he should surrender all his comforts and convenience to participate in the trial proceedings. The court added that it was imperative to make life of litigants least convenient. The court added that courts must always resort to technology whenever possible to make life more convenient for all concerned.

The court added that as per Explanation to Section 355 of BNSS, personal attendance of the accused also included his attendance through audio-video electronic means. The court noted that the explanation showed the need to incorporate and integrate technology into the procedure and it was appropriate for the courts to resort to the same.

Pendency Of Criminal Appeal Against Conviction In Schedule Offence Not Bar For Proceeding With PMLA Trial: Madras High Court

Case Title: The Assistant Director (PMLA) v Ashok Anand

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 388

The Madras High Court recently observed that pendency of a criminal appeal against the conviction in a schedule offence is not a bar to proceed wit trial in the PMLA case.

The court stressed that the schedule case and the PMLA case are distinct and different and thus the trial in money laundering case could not be postponed merely on the pendency of a criminal appeal in the schedule case.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice AD Maria Clete observed that the offence of money laundering had wider ramifications and could not be equated with offence under penal laws. The court added that though schedule offence is a prerequisite for initiation of proceedings under PMLA, once initiated it became independent and had to be dealt with separately.

TN Siddha Medical Council Members Permitted To Practice Modern Medicine But Not To Store Allopathy Medicine Without License: Madras HC

Case Title: Tmt.S.Sindhu v Tamil Nadu State represented by Drugs Inspector,

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 389

The Madras High Court recently observed that while the Siddha practitioners in the State of Tamil Nadu were not barred from practicing modern medicine, they could not store allopathy medicine as the same would be in violation of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act.

The court thus refused to quash a case registered against a Siddha Doctor for storing allopathy medicines in contravention of the Act.

Justice G Jayachandran observed that while there was no bar on Siddha practitioners to practice modern medicine, the case against the doctor was that she had stocked drugs without a license which was in contravention of the Act.

The court noted that as per GO Ms.No.248, issued by the Health and Family Welfare Department on September 8, 2010, the registered members of the Tamil Nadu Siddha Medical Council were permitted to practice modern scientific system of medicine. However, the court noted that as per Section 18(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940, any drug could be stored for distribution, sale, exhibition etc only with license issued for the said purpose.

"Judges Can't Hide Behind Curtains": Madras HC Dismisses Savukku Shankar's Contempt Plea Against DMK Leader For Alleged Comments On Sitting Judge

Case Title: A Shankar and Another v RS Bharathi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 390

The Madras High Court, on Friday, dismissed a contempt petition filed by YouTuber Savukku Shankar against DMK Organisation Secretary RS Bharathi for the latter's comment against Justice N Anand Venkatesh.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam noted that Justice Venkatesh himself had expressed that he did not want to initiate contempt proceedings. The court also noted that the Advocate General had refused to grant consent for initiating contempt proceedings against Bharathi.

The court remarked that citizens were free to access and criticize the conduct of those holding public office. The bench added that transparency was the foundation of the judiciary and that judges could not hide behind curtains.

Governor Bound By Cabinet's Recommendation On Premature Release Of Life Convict: Madras High Court

Case Title: Veera Bharathi v The State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 391

The Madras High Court recently reiterated that the Governor of a State is bound by the decision of the State Cabinet with respect to the recommendations regarding the premature release of convicts.

Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam observed that the power under Article 161 to is to be exercised by the State Government and not the Governor on his own. The bench added that the Governor was bound by the advice of the appropriate Government.

The court added that the Tamil Nadu government had issued a Government Order in G.O.(Ms). No.430, Home (Prison-IV) Department setting out the eligibility criteria for premature release of life convicts. The court noted that this GO was statutory in nature as it was passed under Section 432 of the CrPC giving power to the State to suspend or remit sentences. The court thus held that the power of remission under Article 161 was to be exercised by the State Government and the Governor was bound by the decision of the State.

Family Courts Should Not Insist On Physical Presence Of Parties While Presenting Petition And For Future Hearings: Madras High Court

Case Title: G.Shrilakshmi v Anirudh Ramkumar

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 392

In a significant decision, the Madras High Court has held that the Family Courts should not insist on the physical presence of the parties/spouses at the time of presenting the petition and for future hearings.

Justice M Nirmal Kumar observed that virtual proceedings provided an opportunity to modernize the system and make it more affordable and citizen-friendly. The court thus held that family courts should make use of the video conferencing facilities without insisting on the physical presence of the parties and should not raise technical objections by insisting on the physical presence at any stage.

The court noted that Section 530 of the BNSS emphasized holding even criminal trials through electronic mode. The court added that recently, the justice dispensation system has seen much advancement in the use of technology, and the family court's insistence on physical presence would defeat the very purpose of the video conferencing facility.

Mutual Respect Between Lawyers And Prison Authorities Paramount To Vindicate Grievances Of Prisoners: Madras High Court

Case Title: P. Ananda Kumar v The Director General of Police (Prison) and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 393

The Madras High Court recently observed that mutual respect between lawyers and prison authorities was paramount to vindicating the grievances of the prisoners. The court added that both the lawyers and the prison authorities were working for the benefit of the prisoners and must ensure mutual respect through the process.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam added that the prison authorities were expected to provide all reasonable facilities to the lawyers and treat them with dignity while the lawyers were also expected to respect the prison authorities while performing their duties in a lawful manner.

Plea Opposing Online Release Of Vikram Starrer 'Thangalaan' For Allegedly Targeting Vaishnavites Withdrawn From Madras High Court

Case Title: S Porkodi v The Secretary to Government of India and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 394

A plea challenging the online release of Vikram starrer 'Thangalaan' was withdrawn in the Madras High Court last week.

The withdrawal of the petition has paved way for the online release of the movie which has been directed by PA Ranjith.

A division bench of Chief Justice KR Sriram and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy in its October 19 order noted the submissions and dismissed the case as withdrawn. The plea claimed that the movie targeted Vaishnavites and had sought a stay on its online release.

The plea was filed by Porkodi of Thiruvallur District claiming that the movie speaks about Buddhism and shows religious variation between Vaishnavites and Buddhists by showing Vashnavism and Vaishnavites in a comic role and Buddhism and Buddhists in a sacred role.

UAPA | Requirements Of S.43B Met When Remand Requisition Report Containing Grounds Of Arrest Is Served On Accused: Madras High Court

Case Title: Ahmed Mansoor and Others v The State and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 395

The Madras High Court recently observed that the requirements under Section 43B of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act is met when the remand requisition report, containing the grounds of arrest is served on the accused.

As per Section 43B of the UAPA, any officer arresting a person under Section 43A shall, as soon as may be, inform him of the grounds for such arrest.

A remand requisition report is a document prepared by the investigating agency seeking remand of the arrested persons under Section 167 before the Magistrate. It contains the grounds of arrest and copy of the police diary entries.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam held that when the grounds of arrest were made available in the remand requisition report which was served to the accused before arrest in the presence of his lawyer, the fundamental rights under Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 43B of the UAPA were complied with.

Magistrate Can Take Cognisance Of Offence Based On Protest Petition Even If He Declined To Take Cognisance Of Police Report: Madras High Court

Case Title: N. Manoharan v G Sivakumar and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 396

The Madras High Court recently observed that the Magistrate was empowered to take cognizance of an offense based on a complaint or a protest petition after filing the final report even if he had earlier declined to take cognizance based on the police report.

Justice P Dhanabal observed that the Magistrate could take cognizance even if the accused persons were discharged. The court noted that while exercising this judicial discretion, the Magistrate was expected to apply his mind to the contents of the protest petition

Employer Must Substantiate Misconduct Charges With Documentary Evidence, Mere Allegations Without Proof Insufficient: Madras HC

Case Title: The Management v. R. Parthiban

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 397

Madras High Court: A Division Bench of Justices M.S. Ramesh and C. Kumarappan upheld a Labour Court order reinstating an employee terminated on charges of theft and misconduct, holding that disciplinary action must be supported by substantial evidence rather than mere allegations. The Court emphasized that the employer's failure to produce essential records like stock registers to prove charges of theft and fabrication of accounts rendered the termination unjustified, despite the argument that criminal acquittal standards differ from disciplinary proceedings.

The court cited B.C. Chaturvedi v. Union of India (1995) 6 SCC 749 and Deputy General Manager v. Ajai Kumar Srivastava (2021) 2 SCC 612 to reiterate that judicial review of disciplinary actions is limited to examining whether procedural fairness was followed. In this case, both the Labour Court and the Single Judge found that the inquiry was flawed due to a lack of substantial evidence. The court ruled that there was no basis to overturn these factual findings, as they were neither perverse nor unsupported by evidence. Thus, the court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Labour Court's order reinstating Parthiban with back wages.

Madras High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Probe Into Data Breach At Star Health Insurance

Case Title: Himanshu Pathak v Ministry of Electronics and Information and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 398

The Madras High Court on Wednesday dismissed a plea filed by Cyber Security expert Himanshu Pathak seeking a probe into the alleged security breach at Star Health Insurance. Pathak had also filed an interim petition seeking to stay the online business of the company in light of the recent data leak.

Justice M Dhandapani dismissed the plea noting that a civil suit filed by the company against Pathak was already pending in which a single judge had already passed an interim injunction. Thus, noting that the issues were connected and there could not be parallel proceedings for the same issue, the court dismissed the plea. The court, however, gave liberty to Pathak to work out his remedy before the appropriate authority.

Award Can Be Set Aside On Grounds Of Patent Illegality If Decision Of Arbitrator Is Perverse Or Irrational: Madras High Court

Case Title: Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited v. Offshore Infrastructures Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 399

The Madras High Court Bench of Justice C.Saravanan held that patent illegality as a ground for setting aside an Award is available only if the decision of the Arbitrator is found to be perverse or so irrational that no reasonable person would have arrived at the same or the construction of the contract is such that no fair or reasonable person would take or that the view of the Arbitrator is not even a possible view.

At the outset, the court reiterated the settled law on section 34 of the arbitration act. It referred to the Supreme Court judgment in The Project Director, NHAI Vs. M.Hakim, (2021) wherein it was held that the power to set aside an Arbitral Award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, does not include the authority to modify the Award. It further held that an Award can be set aside only on limited grounds as specified in Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and it is not an appellate provision.

Provisions Of Maternity Benefits Act Prevail Over Contractual Conditions, Would Apply To Contractual Employees: Madras High Court

Case Title: MRB Nurses Empowerment Association v. The Principal Secretary and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 400

The Madras High Court recently reiterated that the provisions of the Maternity Benefits Act would prevail over any contractual conditions set up by the employer to deny maternity benefits to a woman.

The bench of Chief Justice KR Shriram and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy observed that the benefits of the Maternity Benefits Act would be applicable to contractual employees and the employer could not rely on the contract of employment to deny them such benefits.

The court ruled that as per the recent ruling of Dr Kavita Yadav v. Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Department and others, the Supreme Court had held that once a lady employee fulfils the eligibility criteria specified in Section 5(2), she would be eligible for full maternity benefits even if such benefits exceed duration of her contract.

Order Granting Leave Under Section 92 CPC Is Judicial Order And Amenable To Revisional Jurisdiction: Madras High Court

Case Title: Rev.Fr.Savarimuthu and Others v V.S.Jeyapandi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 401

The Madras High Court has recently observed that an order granting leave under Section 92 of the Civil Procedure Code is a judicial order and not an administrative order. The court added that being a judicial order, it was also amenable to revisional jurisdiction of courts. The court thus took a different stand than what had been previously taken by the Madras High Court.

Justice GR Swaminathan observed that the power of the court to grant leave under Section 92 was judicial as it was wielded by a Civil Court and the court had to exercise its discretion on objective grounds as the matter involved rights of parties.

Madras High Court Allows Student To Continue In MBBS Course After Wrongly Choosing BDS Course During Counselling

Case Title: The Director, Directorate of Medical Education and Research and Others v Jubil Timothy and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 402

The Madras High Court recently came to the rescue of a student, who despite having been allotted the MBBS course in the first round of counselling, had wrongly chosen the BDS course.

The bench of Justice R Subramaniam and Justice Sunder Mohan observed that it could not agree with the State's hyper-technical contention and give capital punishment for a genuine mistake committed by the student. The court also noted that the Instructions stated that once a candidate opts for upgradation and gets allotted an upgraded seat, he has to relinquish the seat from previous rounds and join the upgraded seat. The court observed that the Rule was not applicable in the present case, as it dealt with the degradation of the seat and not upgradation.

NHAI Empowered To Lay And Maintain Roads, Cannot Be Mulcted With Liability Under Motor Vehicles Act: Madras High Court

Case Title: The Regional Officer, NHAI v K Vasuki and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 403

The Madras High Court recently held that the National Highways Authority of India which was empowered with the responsibility of laying down and maintaining roads but it could not be mulcted with any liability under the Motor Vehicle Act.

Justice R Vijayakumar observed that the MV Act empowered the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to only pass an award against the insurer or owner or driver of the vehicle and thus did not have jurisdiction to entertain a tortious claim against any person not named under Section 168 of the Act. The court thus set aside an order of the MACT which had imposed liability on the NHAI for the death of a person.

Disciplinary Proceedings Need Only 'Preponderance of Probability', Not 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt': Madras HC

Case Title: S.Harikumar v The Presiding Officer

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 404

Madras High Court: A Division Bench of Justice M.S. Ramesh and Justice C. Kumarappan upheld the dismissal of two Greaves Cotton Limited workers accused of engine sabotage. The court reaffirmed that disciplinary proceedings need only meet the “preponderance of probability” standard rather than criminal law's “beyond reasonable doubt” threshold. The court found the dismissal proportionate given the serious nature of industrial sabotage and its potential implications for public safety and company reputation. The bench validated the inquiry findings, ruling they were based on substantial evidence and proper cross-examination, not mere presumptions.

Cheque Bounce Complaint Maintainable Despite Freezing Of Account By ED/IT Dept If Complainant Establishes 'Insufficiency Of Funds': Madras HC

Case Title: M/s Challani Rank Jewellery and Others v Ashok Kumar Jain

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 405

The Madras High Court recently observed that even if an account is blocked or frozen by the Enforcement Department or the Income Tax Department, a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act would be maintainable if the complainant is able to prove that dehors the freezing, the account did not have sufficient balance to honour the debt.

Justice G Jayachandran observed that the drawer of the cheque, in such cases could take a defence that the account was blocked or frozen. The court relied upon the Supreme Court's decision in Laxmi Dyechem v. State of Gujarat (2012) and held that issuing a cheque without sufficient fund to honour it is the genus of the crime and the complaint would be maintainable.

The court also observed that a single complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was maintainable when all the cheques were presented on the same day and were returned on the same day relying on the earlier decision of the Madras High Court in Suryakant V Kanakia v. Muthukumaran and Manjula v. Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd.

Madras High Court Quashes Defamation Complaint Against Tamil Nadu Speaker M Appavu By AIADMK's Babu Murugavel

Case Title: Mr.Muthuvelaydha Perumal Appavu @ M.Appavu v RM Babu Murugavel

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 406

The Madras High Court on Friday quashed a criminal defamation complaint filed by AIADMK's Babu Murugavel against Tamil Nadu Speaker M Appavu and which was taken on file by the Special Court for Trial of Cases relating to Member of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu.

Justice G Jayachandran noted that the complaint had been filed by Murugavel in his personal capacity and not in a representative capacity. The court added that Murugavel had failed to prove that he was aggrieved by the alleged speeches made by Appavu. The court observed that though Murugavel claimed to have filed the complaint on behalf od the AIADMK party, he had failed to provide any authorisation by the party allowing him to represent the party.

When Muslim Wife Disputes Issuance Of Talaq, It Is Upon Husband To Obtain Judicial Declaration For Dissolution Of Marriage: Madras High Court

Case Title: ABC v. XYZ

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 407

The Madras High Court recently held that when a wife disputes the issuance of talaq by the Muslim husband, it is upon the husband to obtain a judicial declaration that marriage was validly dissolved.

Justice GR Swaminathan noted that Talaq under Muslim personal laws involved a certain procedure which had to be strictly complied. The court thus observed that if the husband claimed to have given talaq to the wife, and the same was disputed by the wife, the only appropriate and legally permissible course would be for the husband to obtain a judicial declaration that marriage is validly dissolved.

Court Not An Expert In History Of Origin Of Race: Madras High Court Asks State To Review Aryan-Dravidian Theory Taught In Schools

Case Title: Mahalingam Balaji v. The Secretary and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 408

The Madras High Court recently refrained from passing any orders on a plea questioning the Aryan-Dravidian race theory taught in educational institutions.

The bench of Chief Justice KR Shriram and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy remarked that the court was not an expert in the history of origin of race and thus could not grant the relief as requested for. The court thus observed that it was for the experts to determine whether the claims made by the petitioner on the two race theory was valid or not.

PMLA | Enforcement Directorate Is Well Within Rights To Challenge Closure Report In Predicate Offence: Madras High Court

Case Title: The Assistant Director v The State and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 409

The Madras High Court recently held that once a complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was registered, the Enforcement Directorate was within its right to challenge the closure report filed in the Predicate Offence if the same resulted in miscarriage of justice.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam reiterated that the PMLA was a standalone offence and that when a closure report was filed in the predicate offence, it would not automatically close the PMLA proceedings also. The court thus quashed a closure report filed by the State police and taken on file by the Magistrate in connection with a cases involving lottery baron Santiago Martin and his wife.

Madras High Court Directs State To Ensure That Persons Holding Diploma In Siddha Medicine Do Not Practice It

Case Title: K Jayakumar v The State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 410

The Madras High Court recently directed the State Government and the Director General of Police to ensure that those having a diploma certificate in Siddha Medicine are not practicing Siddha Medicine. The court added that such a situation would create havoc in the society which was already dealing with several cases of quacks.

Justice B Pugalendhi was hearing a petition filed by K Jayakumar, claiming to be a doctor practicing Siddha Medicine seeking directions to the police not to harass him or interfere with him running the Siddha clinic.

Secret Ballot Mandatory For Union Recognition In Railway Production Units; Madras HC Sets Precedent

Case Title: DMK ICF Labour Union v. Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 411

A Division Bench of Justice M.S. Ramesh and Justice C. Kumarappan directed the Integral Coach Factory (ICF) to implement a Secret Ballot System for trade union recognition, replacing the existing Staff Council model. The Court found that the current system, which splits representation equally between management-nominated officials and worker-elected representatives, impedes effective worker representation and violates Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution. The Court mandated that the Railway Board establish procedures for secret ballot elections within three months, ensuring democratic union representation in the Joint Consultative Machinery (JCM).

Gross Impropriety And Abuse of Judicial Power: Madras HC Sets Aside Discharge Of Former CM Panneerselvam In DA Case

Case Title: Suo Motu v The Deputy Superintendent and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 412

The Madras High Court has set aside the discharge of former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister O Panneerselavm in a disproportionate assets case in 2012.

While setting aside the order of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sivagangai permitting the prosecution to withdraw the case, Justice Anand Venkatesh noted that the order of special judge smacked of gross impropriety and abuse of judicial power.

The court noted that a modus operandi was followed the present case, similar to that followed in other cases involving the Ministers. The court noted that once Panneerselavm was back to the political saddle as the Finance Minister, he lost no time in setting the entire investigation machinery as well as the high constitutional functionaries like the Advocate General and the Public Prosecutor to find out ways and means to diffuse and self-destruct the prosecution case.

Prisoners Are Not Slaves, Cannot Be Tortured In Inhuman Ways To Punish Them For Their Crimes: Madras High Court

Case Title: S Kalavathi v State and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 413

The Madras High Court recently observed that the prisoners were not slaves and could not be treated in inhuman ways to punish them for their crimes. The court added that torturing inmates would only propagate crimes and not mitigate them.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam made the observations in a plea by a prisoner's mother alleging that he was being treated inhumanly by the prison authorities and was even made to do household work of the officers.

The court also observed that the power given to the jail authorities must be exercised with care and caution as abuse of power would create havoc and undermine the ethos of criminal justice system. The court emphasised that nobody could unduly exrcise power over another and such misuse of power had to be dealt with seriously.

Fundamental Right Of Privacy Includes Spousal Privacy, Law Cannot Permit Snooping By Spouses: Madras High Court

Case Title: R v B

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 414

The Madras High Court has observed that the fundamental right of privacy includes spousal privacy. The court noted that the law could not permit or encourage snooping by one spouse on another. The court thus observed that the evidence that was obtained by invading the privacy of the partner was inadmissible in the court.

Justice GR Swaminathan thus came to the rescue of a wife against the order of the Paramakudi Subordinate Court refusing to reject the call records of the wife that was submitted by the Husband during the trial of a marital dispute. The court noted that the husband had stealthily obtained the information pertaining to the call history of his wife and thus had breached the wife's privacy.

Courts Can't Direct Promotions Outside Established Rules And Seniority Framework: Madras HC

Case Title: M.Palanisamy v The Director of Town Panchayats

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 415

The Court held that a Water Pump Operator's promotion to Sanitary Supervisor and subsequent reversion must be evaluated within the framework of the Tamil Nadu Town Panchayat Establishment Rules. Since the position of Water Pump Operator (that the petitioner undertakes) is not among the designated feeder posts (Public Health Workers, Sanitary Workers, or Scavengers) for promotion to Sanitary Maistry, the petitioner's initial promotion was irregular and the reversion was legally justified.

“Extreme Emergency Looms”: Madras High Court Issues Directions For Curbing Tobacco Use Among Children

Case Title: Aunestraja v The State and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 416

The Madras High Court has issued a slew of directions to the Central Government, State Government and prosecuting agencies in an effort to curb the use of tobacco products among school kids.

Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy observed that there was an emergency considering the sudden surge of children using tobacco products and more specifically “Cool Lip” which in turn corrupted the body, mind, and soul of the children.

The court thus directed that the Central Government to issue further directions under Section 86 of the Food Safety and Standards Act 2006 asking the States to ban “cool lip” which has already been classified as an unsafe food based on rules framed by the Central Government. The court added that the State Governments were bound to comply with the directions of the Central Government which were statutory in character.

Courts Must Strive To Remove Barriers Faced By Persons With Disabilities: Madras HC Dispenses Language Test For Speech & Hearing Impaired Engineer

Case Title: B Vidyasagar v The Government of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 417

The Madras High Court recently highlighted the court's duty to remove the barriers faced by persons with disabilities in their daily life.

Justice Anand Venkatesh noted that the barriers faced by persons with disabilities went beyond issues of accessibility and was deep rooted in prejudices and stereotypes in the society. The court added that persons with disabilities faced social, attitudinal, cultural, institutional, structural, legal and environmental barriers, which constitutional courts must, through their judgments, strive to remove.

Manufacturer Of Banned Tobacco Product Which Is 'Food' Can Be Prosecuted Under Food Safety And Standards Act: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s Jaiswal Products v State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 418

The Madras High Court recently upheld the power of the Food Safety Officer to proceed with investigation for sale of banned tobacco products observing that tobacco, with or without any additive was a food product under Section 3(j) of the Food Safety and Standards Act.

In doing so the court said that the manufacturer was liable to explain the manner in which the product was cleared from the manufacturing unit which was in his exclusive knowledge.

A single judge bench of Justice G Jayachandran in its order also noted that the manufacturer of the banned tobacco was liable to face prosecution and could not claim that he had no knowledge how the product entered the banned place.

Chronic Vacancies And Essential Service Needs Justify Regularization Of Contract Employees Despite Article 320: Madras HC

Case Title: The Union of India v The Registrar, CAT

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 419

A Division Bench of Dr. Justice Anita Sumanth and Justice G. Arul Murugan upheld the Central Administrative Tribunal's (CAT) order directing the regularization of contract Veterinary Assistant Surgeons who had served in Puducherry for nearly two decades. Despite objections from UPSC regarding Article 320 requirements, the Court found that the unique circumstances—including chronic vacancies and essential service requirements—justified regularization. The Court distinguished this case from the Umadevi judgment, noting that the appointments were not “backdoor” entries but were based on sanctioned posts and urgent needs.

Arbitrator Nominated U/S 18(3) MSMED Act Erred In Deciding Merits After Finding Respondent Was Not MSME: Madras HC Upholds Setting Aside Of Award

Case Title: M/S. Sivadarshini Papers Limited vs. M/S. Sunwin Papers

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 420

The Madras High Coury bench of Justices R. Suresh Kumar and C. Saravanan has held that an Arbitrator ought not to decide the case on merits after coming to a conclusion that the respondent was not a Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprise (MSME) and therefore not entitled to invoke the machinery under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development (MSMED) Act, 2006. The court upheld the setting aside of the award passed by the Arbitrator.

No Law Fixing Number Of Persons Who Can Accompany A Party In Court: Madras HC Rejects PIL To Limit Advocates Appearing For VIP Litigants

Case Title: N Mahendra Babu v The Registrar General and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 421

The Madras High court has dismissed a petition seeking to restrict the maximum number of advocates appearing and accompanying a VIP or VVIP litigant whenever they appear in subordinate courts.

The bench of Chief Justice KR Shriram and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy held that since there was no law fixing the number of persons who can appear and accompany a party in court, it could not direct the Registrar General to impose restrictions on the same. Thus, noting that the relief as prayed for could not be granted, the court dismissed the petition.

'Lego' A Well Known Mark: Madras High Court Cancels Hyderabad-Based Company's Registration In Confectionary Products

Case Title: LEGO Juris A/S v Gurumukh Singh and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 422

The Madras High Court recently cancelled the registration of a Hyderabad based company's trademark for its confectionary products which was similar to the trademark of famous toy company “Lego”.

Justice PB Balaji held that the company had almost identically adopted Lego's mark, including the style and the colour and had failed to give a satisfactory explanation to the close identity of the two marks. The court thus held that the company had a dishonest intention to use Lego's marks.

The court also noted that though the company claimed to have made a thorough search in the trade mark registry, the fact was that the company had made search only for traders dealing in confectionaries. The court thus noted that the company was conscious that there was a possibility of Lego being applied in other classes and the company's conduct exposed its malafide intention. The court also noted that the company's claim that it had used “Lego” mark honestly could not merit acceptance given that “Lego” had a global reputation and goodwill.

Award Must Not Be Set Aside On Ground Of Mere Erroneous Application Of Law Unless Patent Illegality Is Established U/S 34: Madras HC

Case Title: N.Jayamurugan Vs. M/s.Saravana Global Holdings Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 423

The Madras High Court bench of Justices M.Sundar And K.Govindarajan Thilakavadi affirmed that the scope of interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is limited and within the contours of the ground specified under Section 34 of the Act. To put it otherwise, the award is not required to be set aside on the ground of mere erroneous application of law or by reappreciation of the evidence until and unless it suffers from patent illegality.

The court observed that under Section 25(3) a debtor can enter into an agreement in writing to pay the whole or part of a debt, which the creditor might have enforced but for the law of limitation, and suit can lie on a written promise to pay the barred debt as it is a valid contract. The reason for this provision is that the debt is not extinguished; only the remedy gets barred by passage of time, and this provision does not revive a dead right but merely resuscitates the remedy to enforce the right, which already exists.

Construction Of Contract's Terms Is Task Of Arbitrator, Cannot Be Interfered With U/S 34 Unless Construction Is Unreasonable: Madras HC

Case Title: M/s.Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd Vs. Airports Authority of India and Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 424

The Madras High Court bench of Justices M.Sundar And K.Govindarajan Thilakavadi affirmed that the construction of the terms of a contract is primarily for an Arbitrator to decide unless the Arbitrator construes the contract in such a way that it could be said to be something that no fair-minded or reasonable person could do then only interference under section 34 of the Arbitration Act is justified.

Madras High Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Conferment Of Padma Vibhushan On Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev

Case Title: M Vetri Selvan v Union of India and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 425

The Madras High Court on Thursday dismissed a plea seeking to revoke the Padma Vibhushan Award conferred on Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev.

The bench of Chief Justice KR Shriram and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy dismissed the plea noting that the court was satisfied that the norms for conferment of award was adhered to and thus the relief as sought for could not be granted.

Previously, the court had also expressed its doubts regarding the maintainability of the plea and had remarked that conferment of Padma award might not be within the scope of judicial review.

The petitioner had approached the court claiming that the award be revoked in light of the multiple criminal charges and court cases being faced by Jaggi Vasudev and his foundation. It was argued that the Padma Vibhushan, being the highest civilian honour in the country was awarded to persons with exceptional and distinguished service.

“Scandalous Allegations”: Madras High Court Awards ₹1.1 Crore Damages To Former CM Edappadi Palanisamy For Comments Linking Him To Kodanad Case

Case Title: Edappadi K Palanisamy v Dhanapal

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 426

The Madras High Court on Thursday awarded Rs. 1.1 Crore as compensation to former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Edappadi Palanisamy for comments made by one Dhanapal linking Palanisamy to the crimes that took place in Kodanadu Estate in 2017.

While decreeing the suit in favour of Palanisamy, Justice RMT Teekaa Raman said that the defendant, Dhanapal made the statements with the sole intention of lowering Palanisamy's image with the knowledge that the contents were per se false. The court also noted that the language used by Dhanapal clearly indicated that his intention was to malign Palanisamy and cast aspersions on his character.

On going through the contents of the video of Dhanapal's interview, the court was satisfied that Dhanapal had made scandalous allegations. The court also noted that Dhanapal had blackmailed Palanisamy to extract money as he was booked under a financial fraud case and was in dire need of money. Thus, the court was convinced that while making the statements, Dhanapal had a malice against Palanisamy.

Madras High Court Directs Pondicherry Institute Of Medical Sciences To Surrender 26 Seats For Failure To Comply With MCI Guidelines

Case Title: Pondicherry Institute Of Medical Sciences v The Government of India and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 427

The Madras high court recently directed the Pondicherry Institute of Medical Sciences to forfeit 26 seats – 13 during the 2025-26 academic year and 13 during the 2026-27 academic year for failing to comply with the directions issued by the Medical Council of India during admissions in the year 2017-18.

Justice M. Dhandapani also directed the institute to pay Rs. 10 Lakh to the Spastics Society of Tamil Nadu and Rs. 10 Lakh to Adyar Cancer Institute within 2 weeks of the order. The court made it clear that no action would be taken against the students who had already been admitted and they shall be issued with the course completion certificate if not already issued.

Practise Of Deploying Uniformed Personnel Outside Police, Prison Authorities' Homes Not Done Away With: Madras HC Directs State To Enquire

Case Title: Sujatha v The Additional Chief Secretary to Government and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 428

In a plea concerning condition of prisons, the Madras High Court while expressing its concern said, that despite several orders the practice of deploying "uniformed personnel" in the residences of higher police authorities and prison authorities has not been done away with.

In doing so the court called for stringent government action to ensure that the public servants are utilised only for public welfare and not to perform household works in the residences of the authorities, adding that deployment of uniformed personnel in the residences of the prison authorities is resulting in "dereliction of duty".

A division bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice M Jothiraman emphasized that police authorities and prison authorities were public servants who were paid decent salary from tax payer's money and they were expected to effectively perform their public duty. The bench added that the Government should take stringent action to ensure that public servants were utilized only for the welfare of the public and not to perform household works in the residence of officers.

Impossible To Impart Quality Education Without Filling Sanctioned Posts: Madras HC Forms Expert Committee To Monitor Recruitment In Govt Law Colleges

Case Title: P.Vasantha Kumar v Government of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 429

The Madras High Court has constituted an expert committee headed by retired High Court Judge V Bharathidasan to monitor the selection of Assistant Professors, Assistant Professors (pre-law) and Associate Professors in Government Law Colleges in Tamil Nadu.

Justice Battu Devanand remarked that it was impossible to impart quality legal education without filling up the sanctioned posts of the professors. The court added that by not filling the vacancies in a time-bound manner, the ultimate sufferers were the law students who's potential was lost due to the low quality of education and lack of proper teaching faculity.

The court thus constituted the committee headed by Justice (Retd) V Bharathidasan and Senior Advocate P Wilson and IAS (Retd) Mythili K Rajendran as members. The committee was to monitor the entire selection process including implementation of reservation rules. The committee was also asked to issue necessary instructions and guidelines to the Teachers recruitment Board to finalise and issue notification for recruitment to ensure that the notification is free from litigation.

Can't Expect Media To Verify If Each Advertisement Is Misleading: Madras HC Junks PIL To Prohibit Commercial Ads By Doctors, Hospitals

Case Title: M Mangaiyarkarasi v Union of India and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 430

Dismissing a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking to prohibit television channels, newspapers, magazines, and radio channels from telecasting advertisements of doctors and hospitals to commercially promote medical practice, Madras High Court on Friday orally said it cannot expect the media to verify if each advertisement was misleading.

The bench of Chief Justice KR Shriram and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy observed that if the advertisements by the doctors and hospitals were found to be in contravention of the rules framed by regulatory authorities, complaints could be made to the regulatory authority which could take appropriate action. The court added that it could not expect the media to verify if each advertisement was misleading but could only expect that channels do not advertise something which was detrimental to the general public.

NIA Act | High Courts Cannot Expand Scope Of Interpretation, Condone Delay Beyond Permissible Limit: Madras High Court

Case Title: Union of India v Abdul Razak and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 431

The Madras High Court recently held that the High Court was not empowered to condone the delay in filing an appeal under the National Investigating Agency Act 2008 beyond the permissible limit. As per Section 21 of the Act, an appeal has to be made within 30 days of the date of the order or judgment. The Section allows the High Courts to entertain an appeal even after expiry of 30 days but not beyond 90 days if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for delay.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam held that when there is no constitutional challenge to an enactment, the courts could not read down the provision differently than what the constitution had intended. The court added that the language employed in the provision under the NIA Act was unambiguous and thus the courts could not condone the delay beyond the permissible limits.

HR & CE Authorities Must Take Action On Complaints Of Encroachment, Not Put It In Cold Storage Making Deities Yearn For Due Share: Madras HC

Case Title: M Samudi v The District Collector and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 432

The Madras High Court recently stressed that when an application is received informing instances of encroachment of temple land, the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment authorities were expected to look into the same and take immediate action.

Justice M Dhandapani made the remarks after noting that due to inaction on the part of HR & CE officials, encroachers often enjoyed land to the detriment of the deity. The court emphasised that when an application was filed under Section 78 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act, the authorities were to take immediate steps and ensure that the encroachments are removed and the lawful owners are benefitted.

No Explicit Option For CPF Means Automatic Transition To GPF Scheme: Madras HC Upholds Pension Rights Of KV Teachers

Case Name: Union of India v. C.V.L. Annapurna

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 433

Madras High Court: A Division Bench of Justice Anita Sumanth and Justice G. Arul Murugan upheld the Central Administrative Tribunal's orders granting pension rights under the General Provident Fund (GPF) scheme to retired Kendriya Vidyalaya teachers. The Court ruled that teachers who had not explicitly opted to remain under the Contributory Provident Fund (CPF) scheme by January 31, 1989, were automatically entitled to GPF benefits as per the 1988 Government Office Memorandum. The Court rejected the argument that continuous receipt of CPF benefits implied a choice to remain in the CPF scheme, emphasizing that KVS's failure to implement the automatic transition couldn't prejudice the teachers' rights.

Long Service And Transparent Recruitment Merit Regularization Despite Absence Of Rules: Madras HC

Case Title: G.Kulanchiyappan v Vice Chancellor, IMU

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 434

Madras High Court: A Division Bench of Justice Anita Sumanth and Justice G. Arul Murugan directed the Indian Maritime University (IMU) to regularize the services of eight contractual employees. The Court ruled that their appointments, though irregular, were not illegal as they were made through a transparent recruitment process including public advertisement and interviews. The Court emphasized that the absence of recruitment rules until 2015 and the employees' decade-long unblemished service warranted regularization, particularly given IMU's prior regularization of seven similarly situated workshop employees.

Amount Received In Advance For Services To Be Treated As Income Of Assessee, Chargeable Under Income Tax: Madras High Court

Case Title: The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/s. Johnson Lifts Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 435

The Madras High Court ruled that any amount received in advance for services should be treated as the income of the assessee and is, therefore, subject to income tax.

The Division Bench of Justices R. Suresh Kumar and C. Saravanan observed that “if “Accounting Standards” are properly applied by an assessee, the “accounting income” for the payment of income tax will be available. However, if an assessee fails to adopt “Accounting Standards” properly for computation of income, the discretion is vested with the Assessing Officer under Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.”

[Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax] Assessee Liable For Tax On Proceeds From Sale Of Unredeemed Articles By Auctioneers: Madras High Court

Case Title: The Triplicane Permanent Fund Ltd. v. The Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 436

The Madras High Court stated that assessee is liable to tax on consideration received from sale of unredeemed articles by auctioneers.

The Division Bench of Justices Anita Sumanth and G. Arul Murugan observed that “the levy of penalty under Section 12(3)(a), in the case of non-filing of returns, is, automatic. Admittedly, the assessee has not filed the returns and hence, the basis of assessment would be irrelevant.”

Cross-Examination Requests In Show Cause Proceedings Cannot Be Allowed Without A Reply From Noticee: Madras High Court

Case Title: Nalin Gupta v. Commissioner of Customs

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 437

The Madras High Court stated that a request for cross-examination of a witness in a Show Cause proceeding cannot be allowed if no reply on merits has been provided by the noticee.

The Division Bench of Justices R. Suresh Kumar and C. Saravanan observed that “………the question of entertaining an application for cross-examination of the witnesses without any reply on merits by a notice in a show cause proceeding is to be eschewed and should not to be allowed.”

The bench noted that the question of granting extensions under the first proviso to Section 28(9) of the Customs Act, 1962 will arise only after the limitation for passing Order determining duty or interest, as the case may be, within the time stipulated under Section 28(9) of the Customs Act, 1962 had expired.

Further, the bench stated that only after the period of six months or one year, as the case may be, the senior officer could extend the period by another six months or one year specified in Clause (a) and Clause (b) under the first proviso to Section 28(9) of the Customs Act, 1962. The second proviso to Section 28(9) of the Customs Act, 1962, further contemplates abatement of the proceedings if after the extension period under the first proviso to Section 28(9) of the Customs Act, 1962, no Orders are passed.

Recovery Action Against Company Directors Cannot Be Initiated If Status Of Assessee Is Non-Existent: Madras High Court

Case Title: Lakshana Cotton Spinning Mills Limited v. The Commercial Tax Officer

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 438

The Madras High Court ruled that recovery actions against the directors of a company cannot be initiated if the status of the assessee is non-existent.

The Division Bench of Justices Anita Sumanth and G. Arul Murugan observed that “while in the case of amalgamation, it is only the apparent and outer shell of the company which is destroyed…. However, in the case of dissolution, the entity wholly ceases to exist.”

Hindu Succession Act |2005 Amendment Giving Equal Rights To Daughter Resulted In Reducing Shares Of Mother & Widow: Madras High Court

Case Title: Vasumathi and Another v R Vasudevan and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 439

While discussing the 2005 amendments to the Hindu Succession Act, Justice N Seshasayee of the Madras High Court observed that while the amendment ensured that daughter's got a share in the ancestral property, it also took away the quantum of property that would otherwise vest with the widow and the mother of a deceased.

The court added that the effect of a notional partition was two fold. Firstly to interfere with the right of the surviving coparceners to succeed to the share of the deceased coparcenor by survivorship and secondly to reduce the combined holding to the extent of the property that became allottable to Class I female heirs.

Discussing the observations of the Supreme Court in Vineeta Sharma v Rakesh Sharma, the court added that the intent of the legislature while bringing in the 2005 amendment was to provide security and dignity to a certain class of female heirs of a deceased coparcener. The court observed that the notional partition under Section 6 of the Act engineered a vertical and horizontal division of ancestral property among the coparceners, as a vehicle to grant some right in the ancestral property to a class of female heirs.

Natural For Two Persons In Love To Hug & Kiss Each Other: Madras High Court Quashes Sexual Harassment Case Against Man

Case Title: Santhanaganesh v State and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 440

The Madras High Court recently quashed criminal proceedings initiated against a man under Section 354A IPC for allegedly committing sexual harassment on a girl.

Justice Anand Venkatesh observed that to constitute an offence of sexual harassment, a man must have committed physical contact and made advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures. In the present case, the court noted that the love affair between the man and the woman was admitted and it was quite natural for two persons in love to hug and kiss each other.

Madras High Court Refuses To Quash Summons Issued To MD Of Manappuram Finance Ltd For Allegedly Auctioning Stolen Gold

Case Title: VP Nandhakumar v The Inspector of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 441

The Madras High Court recently refused to quash a notice issued to the CEO and Managing Director of Manappuram Finance Limited for allegedly auctioning stolen gold.

Justice KK Ramakrishnan of the Madurai bench refused to quash the notice issued to VP Nandhakumar by the Central Bureau of Investigation under Section 41 (A) of CrPC. The court added that the procedure under Section 41(A) was applicable to all persons and whatever his position, he had to appear before the investigating officer and co-operate with the investigation

The court agreed with the prosecution's submission and noted that whether Nandhakumar had knowledge or not was to be investigated by the CBI and presently the CBI had issued the summons only to collect materials from Nandhakumar. Thus, the court noted that he was duty bound to appear and to co-operate with the investigation.

Honouring Bharat Mata Is An Expression Of Love And Pride: Madras High Court Asks State To Return Bharatha Matha Statue Taken From BJP Office

Case Title: Bharathiya Janata Party v The District Collector and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 442

The Madras High Court recently asked the State to return a Bharatha Matha statue that was seized from the Bharathiya Janata Party's office in Virudhanagar East.

Though the authorities claimed to have removed the statue to maintain peace and harmony in the society, Justice Anand Venkatesh observed that no person in their right mind would contend that the expression of one's patriotism would imperil the interest of the State or any community.

The court went on to add that the installation of the statue on a private property was deeply personal and symbolised the individual's reverence for the motherland. The court remarked that honouring Bharatha Matha by erecting a statue was an expression of love and pride and served as a reminder of the values and sacrifices associated with one's heritage. The court said that the statute was like a personal shrine that embodied hope, unity and respect for the land and invited ideals of freedom, resilience and cultural identity that Bharatha Matha represents.

Madras High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Actress Kasthuri For Alleged 'Controversial Remarks' About Telugu Community

Case Title: Kasthuri v The State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 443

The Madras High Court on Thursday (November 14) denied anticipatory bail to South Indian actress Kasthuri for her alleged comments against the Telugu community in Tamil Nadu.

A single bench of Justice Anand Venkatesh, on Thursday dismissed the anticipatory bail plea filed by the actress.

Speaking at a Brahmin meet in Chennai on November 3^rd, the South Indian actress had purportedly made comments against the Telugu community suggesting that the Telugu people, who had come to serve the courtesans of the Tamil Kings were now claiming to be of Tamil race. After widespread backlash, Kasthuri issued an apology stating that her comments were specific to some individuals and not against the Telugu community.

ALSO READ: Tendering Apology As A Matter Of Course To Escape Consequences Of Hate Speech Cannot Be Entertained: Madras High Court

Advocates Should Try To Resolve Matrimonial Disputes 'Without Adding Fuel To Fire': Madras High Court Suggests BCI To Form Guidelines

Case Title: ABC v XYZ

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 444

The Madras High Court recently suggested the Bar Council of India to formulate guidelines ensuring that Advocates resolve matrimonial disputes amicably without adding fuel to the fire.

The bench of Justice Bhavani Subbaroyan and Justice KK Ramakrishnan remarked that lawyers had an enormous social responsibility to ensure that the social fiber of family life is not ruined or demolished. The court added that legal professionals should ensure that exaggerated versions of small incidents are not reflected in criminal complaints and must maintain the noble traditions of the profession.

The court thus suggested that advocates should follow ethical standards when parties solicit their advice and never misguide the parties. The court added that advocates should not give unprofessional advice to implicate persons who are not even remotely connected to the alleged occurrences. The advocates were also asked to advise the clients to not rope in unconnected persons and inform the clients about the legal consequences of giving false complaint against unconnected persons. The court suggested that in cases involving two individuals, especially a family, the advocates should try to advise for an amicable settlement as far as possible.

Opinion On Merits Destined To Remain In Sealed Cover Forever: Madras HC Observes As 46-Yr-Old Dispute Ends After Parties Reach Compromise

Case Title: P.A.Ramasubramania Raja v. K.M.Sanjeevi Raja

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 445

A 46 year old land dispute suit was recently disposed of by the Madras High Court after the parties informed the court that they have arrived at a compromise.

"Shocked" by the long pendency of the suit, the High Court had in July this year transferred the suit–earlier pending before the lower court, to itself by exercising powers under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Article 227 of the Constitution, after one of the parties approached the court challenging the order in an interlocutory application.

Justice Bharath Chakravarthy, on noting that there was a chance of settlement, gave another opportunity to the parties to come up with their options though the court had already prepared the judgement. Following this, the parties arrived at a settlement and filed a joint compromise memo before the court.

Expenses Incurred For Payment Of Foreclosure Premium Of Loan Is Allowable As Business Expenditure U/S 37(1): Madras High Court

Case Title: EIH Associated Hotels Ltd vs. CIT

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 446

The Madras High Court recently ruled that the expenditure incurred for payment of foreclosure premium for restructuring loan and obtaining fresh loan at a lower rate of interest is allowable as business expenditure u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act.

Such ruling came while dealing with a case where scrutiny proceedings were initiated, leading in revisional assessment u/s 263, based on the assumption that assessment order was prejudicial to the interest of Revenue Department, and resultant disallowance of payment of foreclosure premium as a business expenditure.

The Division Bench of Justice Anita Sumanth and Justice G. Arul Murugan observed that “Though mere disagreement with the view taken by the AO would not be a sufficient ground for invoking power u/s 263, it is quite another matter if the conclusion of the authority is palpably erroneous or contrary to settled law or judgment of the superior Courts”.

Madras High Court Restrains Grant Of Award In M S Subbulakshmi's Name To Musician TM Krishna

Case Title: Music Academy v V Shrinivasan and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 447

The Madras High Court has restrained The Hindu from presenting the 'Sangita Kalanidhi Award' in the name of M S Subbulakshmi to musician T M Krishna.

The Court said that the Sangita Kalanidhi Award and cash prize can be granted to TM Krishna but not in the name of M S Subbulakshmi. Justice G Jayachandran passed the interim order in a suit filed by the grandson of M S Subbulakshmi saying that the conferment of the award was against her wish and mandate. While dismissing an application filed by the Music Academy challenging the suit moved by the grandson, the court also noted that Shrinivasan, Subbulakshmi's grandson had the locus to maintain the suit since he was a beneficiary of Subbulakshmi's will.

Madras High Court Suggests Bringing In Statutory Body To Regulate Church Properties, Seeks Centre's Stand

Case Title: Byju Nizeth Paaul v The Directorate of Collegiate Education and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 448

The Madras High Court has suggested bringing in a statutory body to regulate the affairs of the church and church properties, similar to the charitable endowments of Hindus and Muslims.

Justice N Satish Kumar noted that matters of trusts, trustees, charities and religious endowments and religious institutions fall under the Concurrent list and thus there was no bar for the Central Government or the State government to bring in a legislation to this effect.

The court added that a Statutory Board could be established to make the institutions more accountable and to regulate their affairs. The court also noted that while "charitable endowments of Hindus and Muslims are subject to statutory regulation" however no such comprehensive regulation exists for endowments of Christians; the only scrutiny/oversight over the affairs of these institutions is by way of a suitunder Section 92 CPC.

The court noted that of late, there was an increase in litigations related to church properties where the courts have observed mismanagement of church properties and its funds. The court added that since these institutions were involved in public functions in the form of educational institutions, hospitals etc and since their functioning would affect the public at large, it was necessary to protect and safeguard the assets and funds of the institutions.

Madras High Court Orders CBI Probe Into Kallakurichi Hooch Tragedy

Case Title: IS Inbadurai v The Chief Secretary and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 449

The Madras High Court has directed the Central Bureau of Investigation to conduct a probe into the Kallakurichi Hooch Tragedy that claimed the lives of around 67 persons after consuming illicit arrack.

A bench of Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice PB Balaji directed the CBI to conduct the probe as expeditiously as possible and also directed the CB-CID to handover the case files and extend cooperation to the investigation. The orders were passed in a batch of petitions seeking a CBI inquiry into the incidents.

The petitioners had argued that the state machinery had failed in tackling the sale and consumption of spurious liquor. It was contended that hooch tragedy incidents were not new to the state and that the entire system of Tamil Nadu including the police, revenue authorities, etc had failed which was evident from the preset incident in Kallakurichi.

Validly Recorded Cross-Examination Evidence Can't Be Eschewed But Court Can Assess Its Probative Value During Final Evaluation Of Case: Madras HC

Case Title: S. Nirmala & Ors. v. Shanthi Harikrishnan & Ors., OSA.Nos.187 of 2024

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 450

In a recent case, the Madras High Court dismissed the application to eschew the cross-examination evidence of a defendant witness from the proceedings.

The bench comprising Justice S.S. Sundar and Justice A.D. Maria Clete noted that once cross-examination evidence is validly recorded under oath, it cannot be expunged from the proceedings, as the statutory provisions do not permit such an action.

“If a witness has been cross-examined under oath and an objection arises later concerning the interest of the party who cross-examined the witness, questioning its adverseness and the priority of cross-examination, the previously recorded evidence cannot be eschewed. However, the court should assess the probative value of such evidence in the final evaluation of the case.”, the court observed.

“Church Properties Being Swindled Against Tenets Of Bible” Madras High Court Orders CBI Probe Into Sale Of Church Land To Private Persons

Case Title: D.Devasahayam v Central Bureau of Investigation

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 451

The Madras High Court has directed the Central Bureau of Investigation to register a complaint and inquire into the sale of a church land to private persons. The land, which is originally a government land, was assigned to the church to be used for the welfare of destitute women and children.

Justice KK Ramakrishnan noted that the Church of South India (CSI) had instead transferred the property to private persons for their own “selfish purpose” instead of working for the noble object for which the land was originally assigned. The court was thus satisfied that there were prima facie materials to warrant a CBI inquiry and thus directed the CBI to register the complaint and proceed accordingly.

The court added that the church had now become voiceless with the administrators muzzling the voice of those who question the illegal activities. The court thus observed that it was bound to protect the interest of the church under the parents patriae jurisdiction. The court observed that while the bishop and administrators of the church were duty bound to keep then property for dedicated purpose, the property was often swindled against the tenets of the bible.

“Serious Issue”: Madras High Court Orders Probe After IO Says She Didn't Investigate Case, Her Signatures Were Forged

Case Title: P Venkatesan v The Superintendent of Police and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 452

The Madras High Court recently ordered a de novo investigation into a case after the Investigation Officer informed the court that she had not investigated the case and her signature in the final report was forged.

After the unusual turn of events, Justice Anand Venkatesh directed the CBCID to take over the investigation. The court added that the investigation should not be limited to the issue of the case but also ascertain as to who prepared the earlier police report. Calling it a serious issue, the court added that after the truth comes to light, independent proceedings needed to be initiated.

[NDPS Act] Prima Facie Every Cell Of Magic Mushroom Contains Chemical, To Be Weighed Entirely To Ascertain Commercial Quantity: Madras HC

Case Title: Dhanaraj v The Inspector of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 453

While hearing a bail plea under the NDPS Act, the Madras High Court recently noted that every cell of 'magic mushroom' contains psychotropic chemicals and hence the entire mushroom would have to be weighed to determine if the quantity confiscated is falling under commercial quantity.

Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy thus while dismissing a bail plea prima facie differed from the stand taken by the Karnataka High Court in Saeidi Mozdhdeh Ehsan v State of Karnataka wherein a single judge had opined that the quantity of the substance had to be taken to find out if the seized item fell within commercial quantity.

Differing with the Karnataka High Court, Justice Chakravarthy observed that the penal statutes had to be construed strictly without interpreting them to "aid the accused".

Section 303(2) BNS | FIR Can Be Registered Only After Getting Appropriate Order From Magistrate: Madras High Court

Case Title: Jebaraj @ Jeyaraj v The State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 454

The Madras High Court recently observed that the offence under Section 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita is a non-cognizable and bailable offence and an FIR could be filed for these offence only after getting appropriate orders from the Magistrate.

Justice Anand Venkatesh thus quashed an FIR filed against the man. Though the court noted that the FIR itself was not sustainable in law and thus the anticipatory bail was also not maintainable, the court thought it fit to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC and interfere with the FIR.

'Father Stan Swamy Has Taken Efforts For Tribal Welfare' : Madras High Court Allows Installation Of His Statute In Private Land

Case Title: Piyush Sethia v The District Collector and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 455

The Madras High Court has allowed a man to install a stone pillar containing Father Stan Swamy's photo on his private land, honoring the work done by the latter for the Tribal persons.

Quashing a notice issued by the State authorities, Justice M Dhandapani remarked that Fr Stan Swamy had taken a lot of efforts for the welfare of the tribal persons. The court also noted that citizens had a right to install statues in their private property and the only restriction was that communal conflicts should not result from such erection. In the present case, the court opined that the notice was improper and thus was inclined to set aside the same.

Madras High Court Stays Single Judge Order Directing CBI Probe Into Alleged Illegal Sale Of Church Property

Case Title: Church of South India v D Devasahayam and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 456

A division bench of the Madras High Court has stayed a single judge order directing the Central Bureau of Investigation to probe into the alleged illegal sale of a church property to private persons.

The bench of Justice MS Ramesh and Justice AD Maria Clete stayed the order of Justice KK Ramakrishnan, on an appeal filed by the Church of South India. Since an argument was raised as to the maintainability of the appeal, the division bench made it clear that the interim order was subject to maintainability.

While ordering CBI probe, the Single Judge had noted that the CSI had illegally transferred the land which was originally a Government Land assigned to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Mission (ABCFM) to be used for the welfare of destitute women and children.

Juvenile Offenders Must Be Brought Back Into Mainstream Society: Madras HC Suggests Implementation Of Reformative Projects Across State

Case Title: X v The State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 457

Lamenting over the manner in which juvenile offenders were treated often pushing them into becoming future notorious criminals, the Madras High Court recently suggested that reformative projects be implemented across the State to ensure that juvenile offenders are brought back into the mainstream of the society.

The court said this while granting bail to a 19-year-old boy accused of theft of movable articles like machine motor and submersible motor worth Rs.45,000.

In doing so, Justice N Anand Venkatesh noted that even though the State had implemented reformative projects like Paravai and Pattam in Chennai, these projects needed to be spread across the State. The court emphasised that the system and the people had a duty to bring the juvenile offenders back to the mainstream society.

Executing Security Bond For Good Behaviour Under Section 109 CrPC Cannot Be Construed As Criminal Proceedings: Madras High Court

Case Title: S.Saravanan v The Director General of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 458

The Madras High Court recently observed that executing a bond for good behaviour could not be considered as a criminal proceeding and the same cannot be held against a person to deny him employment.

Relying upon a previous order of the court, the bench of Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice R Poornima observed that the purpose of such proceedings was to prevent commission of offence. Therefore, even though there is registration of FIR, the persons cannot be construed as accused.

Madras High Court Upholds 'Only Hindus' Condition For Appointment In Temple-Run Self-Financing College, Applies Article 16(5)

Case Title: A Suhail v State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 459

The Madras High Court recently held that a self-financing institution which is run by a temple would not come within the purview of Article 16(1) and Article 16(2) of the Constitution.

Justice Vivek Kumar Singh thus observed that only Hindus would be eligible for appointment in such institutions as it is covered under Article 16(5) of the Constitution. The court highlighted that as per Section 10 of the Hindu religious and Charitable Endowment Act, only a person professing the Hindu religion could be appointed to the colleges and he shall cease to hold office when he ceases to profess the religion.

Magic Mushroom Per Se Not Narcotic Drug, Quantity Of Psylocybin Present Must Be Determined To Check Commercial Quantity: Madras High Court

Case Title: S. Mohan v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 460

The Madras High Court has held that magic mushroom per se does not satisfy the requirement of a narcotic drug or a psychotropic substance under Section 2 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

Justice Anand Venkatesh thus took a different stand than that taken by Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy recently wherein Justice Chakravarthy had held that prima facie every cell of magic mushroom contained chemical and should be weighed entirely to determine the commercial quantity.

Justice Venkatesh on the other hand held that magic mushroom was not per se a contraband and can be considered a contraband only when it contains psilocybin. Thus, the court held that in the absence of any material to conclude the level of psylocybin, the court could not assume that the entire magic mushroom falls within the rigours of NDPS Act.

The court also added that magic mushroom was not a mixture of narcotic drug or psychotropic substance with a neutral substance and even if it was assumed to be a mixture, mushroom was a fungi and was a natural produce and thus could not be a mixture made through preparation as provided under the Act.

Madras High Court Directs State Govt To Frame Rules Under PoSH Act, Consider Bringing Separate Dept For Women Empowerment

Case Title: X v. State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 461

The Madras High Court has directed the State of Tamil Nadu to frame rules for the effective implementation of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act (PoSH Act).

Justice RN Manjula noted that though it was not fair to assume that the State lacked intention to implement the Act, the presence of inherent indifference could not be denied.

In its 139-page order, the court also noted that all women welfare projects were entrusted with Social Welfare and Women Empowerment Department, which was also responsible for Child welfare. The court observed that since the department was already saddled with so many responsibilities, it could be difficult for them to monitor all the departments regarding implementation of Act. The court thus asked the State to conduct a study on the feasibility of having a separate department for women empowerment by, separate from the Social Welfare Department.

Enact Law With Severe Punishment For Child Sexual Abuse By Family Members: Madras HC Upholds Man's Conviction For Raping Stepdaughter

Case Title: R. v The State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 462

The Madras High Court recently asked the State Government to take "serious efforts" to enact laws imposing "severe punishments" in cases of sexual offences by family members or close friends involving children.

In doing so the court further said State should take measures for providing awareness programs and provide funds for opening protection homes for children to protect them from sexual offences. The court said so while noting that "in our country", number of children faced sexual assault by close relatives "viz., father, brother, uncle, grandfather or close family friends" and that studies had revealed that sexually abused children experience clinically significant symptoms in the affective, cognitive, physical, and behavioral domains.

The court made the observation while dismissing a man's appeal who was convicted and sentenced for sexually abused his step daughter and impregnated her. The court took note of the “shocking” news reports that as per the National crime Records Bureau, in 96% of the cases, the sexual abusers were known to the children. The court added that in most of these cases, the offenders took advantage of their dominating position and sexually abused the children under threat or coercion

“How Can A Funeral Procession Be Called Public Nuisance?”: Madras HC Dismisses Caste Association's Plea With Costs, Calls It Inhuman

Case Title: Kammavar Samuga Nala Sangam v. The District Collector

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 463

The Madras High Court recently dismissed a petition filed by Kammavar Samuga Nala Sangam seeking directions to the authorities to not allow private persons to conduct funeral procession march through their residential streets and not to create public nuisance. The court also imposed a cost of Rs 25,000 on the association.

Calling the association's approach “inhuman”, the bench of Justice MS Ramesh and Justice AD Maria Clete expressed its dissatisfaction. The court also observed that if such a plea was allowed it would possibly result in disharmony and chaos among the villagers.

Wondering how a funeral possession could be called a public nuisance, the court added that the association should aim to address the welfare measures of its members and should not degrade itself by filing such irresponsible petitions.

Limitation Period For Challenging Assessment Orders U/S 107 Of GST Act Begins From Date Of Rejection Of Rectification Application: Madras HC

Case Title: M/s. SPK and Co. v. The State Tax Officer

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 464

The Madras High Court stated that limitation period for challenging assessment orders under section 107 of GST Act commences from the date of rejection of the rectification application filed under section 161.

The Bench of Justice K. Kumaresh Babu observed that “………the period of limitation for challenging the order of assessment shall start ticking from the date of rejection of the rectification application

Madras High Court Grants Bail To 4 Students Involved In Clashes That Resulted In Death Of A Student, Asks Them To Assist In Trauma Ward

Case Title: Chandru and Others v. State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 465

The Madras High Court has granted bail to four students who were allegedly involved in group rivalry clashes that resulted in the death of a student.

Justice AD Jagadish Chandira ordered the students to be released on bail after executing a bond for Rs 15,000 with two sureties, one of whom should be the father or mother of the student. The court also asked all four students to assist in the Trauma ward of Rajiv Gandhi Government General Hospital & the Government Kilpauk Medical College Hospital and to prepare a writeup of their experience.

“Caused Damage To Parties”: Madras High Court Imposes Cost On Former MP For Filing Plea Against Mining Without Proper Research

Case Title: R Thamaraiselvan v. Government of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 466

The Madras High Court recently dismissed a petition filed by former DMK MP challenging the government notification inviting tenders for quarry lease.

While doing so, the bench of Chief Justice KR Shriram and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy also imposed a cost of Rs 4 Lakh (Rs 1 Lakh for each petition) for filing the petition without proper research. The court directed the cost to be donated to the Little Heart Training Centre for Intellectual Disabled Boys in Dharmapuri District.

Magistrates Must Ensure That Accused Get Sufficient Legal Advice Before Pleading Guilty: Madras High Court

Case Title: Sathish and Another v Food Safety Officer

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 467

The Madras High Court recently allowed two men to contest their case before the trial court even after making a submission admitting their guilt.

Justice Anand Venkatesh made the order after noting that the men had admitted their guilt before the trial court without knowing the consequences. The court thus observed that the Magistrate must ensure that the accused persons have sufficient legal advice before pleading guilty and it was not necessary for the magistrate to immediately act upon the pleading of guilt especially when the punishment provided was quite serious.

Linguistic Minority Medical Colleges Bound By NMC's 50% PG-Seat Sharing Rule, Ensures Implementation Of Reservation Policies: Madras HC

Case Title: Sri Venkateshwaraa Medical College Hospital and Research Centre v The National Medical Commission

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 468

The Madras High Court has recently made it clear that linguistic minority self financing medical colleges are bound by the National Medical Council's 50% seat sharing rule. As per the Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations 2000, medical colleges were to surrender 50% of the seats in PG Medical Courses to the State/Union Territory.

Justice Vivek Kumar Singh observed that only when the States and Union Territories had control over some seats, they could implement the reservation policies in its full effect. Thus, the court highlighted that seat sharing was unavoidable and was a sine-qua -non for the implementation of reservation policy.

No Necessity To Call Upon Accused To File Counter In Extension Application, Presence Only Needed To Consider Objections: Madras HC

Case Title: Mohamed Asaruthin v State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 469

The Madras High Court recently observed that when an application for extension was filed by the prosecution, the presence of the accused was ensured only to inform him about the application and consider the objections, if any. The court added that there was no necessity for the court to call upon the counter of the accused.

Justice Sunder Mohan emphasized that while considering the application for extension, the court was only required to consider whether the report of the prosecutor satisfied the twin conditions – that there was appreciable progress in the investigation and that there are compelling reasons to justify further detention pending investigation.

“Either Lied In Court Or Has Been Set Up”: Madras High Court Imposes ₹20 Lakh Cost On Litigant, Restrains Him From Filing PILs For 1 Year

Case Title: T. H. Rajmohan v The Secretary to the Government and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 470

The Madras High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation filed by a 62-year-old man and imposed a cost of Rs. 20 Lakh on him. The court also restrained the PIL petitioner from filing any PILs in the court without prior permission for 1 year.

The bench of Chief Justice KR Shriram and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy ordered so after noting that the petition was not Bonafide and that the petitioner had willingly failed to disclose material information.

Headmaster Guardian Of Entire School, Must Immediately Intimate Authorities Of Incidents Under POCSO Act: Madras HC Refuses To Quash Proceedings

Case Title: Aathimoolam v State and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 471

While refusing to set aside the criminal proceedings initiated against a school headmaster, the Madras High Court emphasised that the Headmaster was the guardian of the entire school and was expected to report any instances under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

Justice P Velmurugan observed as under,

“The Head Master is the guardian of the entire school. If any incident covered under POCSO Act has taken place, the same has to be immediately intimated either to the District Child Protection Officer or to the Police concerned,” the court said.

Registration Of Adoption Deed 'Futile', Has No Legal Sanctity And Does Not Give Any Right To Parties Irrespective Of Religion: Madras HC

Case Title: C Pakkir Maideen and Others v The Principal Secretary To Government and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 472

The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court has made it clear that the registration of an adoption deed is a futile exercise as it does not confer any rights on the parties to adoption and does not have any legal sanctity. The court thus observed that the registration of adoption deed could not be asked as a matter of right before the registering authority.

Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan thus directed the Inspector General (IG) of Registration to issue necessary circulars to all registrars asking them to refrain from registering any deed of adoption, irrespective of their religion.

Ineligibility Of Arbitrator Cannot Be Challenged First Time Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court

Case Title: VR Dakshin Private Limited Verus SCM Silks Private Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 473

The Madras High Court bench of of Chief justice Mr. K.R.Shriram and Justice Senthil Kumar Ramamoorthy has held that the ineligibility of the Arbitrator cannot be challenged for the first time under section 34 of the Arbitration Act when there were enough opportunities to challenge the same in the earlier proceedings.

It also noted that section 4 of the Act provides that when a party knows that any requirement under the arbitration agreement has not been complied with and yet proceeds with the arbitration without stating his objection to such non-compliance, such party shall be deemed to have waived his right to so object.

Informal Opinion Rendered By Expert Not Binding On Court: Madras High Court Grants Bail To Man Found In Possession Of Magic Mushrooms

Case Title: P.Rajkumar v The State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 474

The Madras High Court recently held that while considering bail applications, an informal opinion rendered by an expert was not binding on the court. It reiterated that while exercising bail jurisdiction, the court had to consider the language adopted in the enactment and only had to be prima facie satisfied whether there was a reasonable chance of conviction.

Justice Anand Venkatesh made the observations while discussing a recent judgment rendered by Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy in which the latter had an informal interaction with an expert and concluded that every cell of a magic mushroom contained chemicals and that entire quantity had to be measured to determine the commercial quantity.

The court reiterated that while considering the bail application, the court must prima facie satisfy itself on whether there was a reasonable chance for the accused to be held guilty. The court added that at the stage of bail, the court was not expected to meticulously examine the materials collected at the stage of investigation. The court added that while considering bail, the court had to look into the language adopted in the enactment.

Kodanad Heist-Murder Case | Madras High Court Allows Accused To Examine Former CM Edappadi Palaniswami, VK Sasikala As Witnesses

Case Title: Deepu and Others v State and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 475

The Madras High Court has allowed a criminal revision petition filed by three accused in the Kodanadu heist and murder case allowing them to summon and examine former Tamil Nadu CM Edappadi Palaniswami and VK Sasikala among others as witnesses.

Justice P Velmurugan noted that the application of the accused to examine the witnesses was not without reason and the same would not cause any delay as further investigation had been ordered in the case. The court thus directed the Sessions Judge to comlete the trial by giving opportunity to both the parties and give an opportunity to the accused to examine the 8 witnesses as sought for.

No Fixed Parameters For Cruelty In Matrimonial Case, Rude Language And Ill-Treatment Wouldn't Per Se Constitute Legal Cruelty: Madras HC

Case Title: ABC v. XYZ

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 476

The Madras High Court recently highlighted that the concept of cruelty under matrimonial cases has undergone substantial change and there could not be any fixed parameters for determining what constitutes acts of cruelty.

A division bench of Justice J Nisha Banu and Justice R Kalaimathi said that what amounted to acts of cruelty would differ from person to person, man to woman and thus, a broad approach was needed. The court also added that the matters had to be dealt with latitudinarianism in the modern era.

The high court, while making the observations, refused relief to a husband who had claimed divorce on the grounds of physical and mental cruelty. The court noted that though the husband had made allegations of physical and mental cruelty, he had not specified even one instance or given evidence in support of the same. The court noted that it could not infer anything from the facts of the case which could prove that there were alleged acts of cruelty by the wife and thereby dismissed the husband's plea.

Madras High Court Sets Aside Single Judge Order Which Restrained Conferment Of Award In MS Subbulakshmi's Name To TM Krishna

Case Title: The Music Academy v V Shrinivasan and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 477

The Madras High Court has set aside a single judge order restrainig The Music Academy and The Hindu group from conferring the Sangita Kalanidhi Award to musical TM Krishna in Late MS Subbulakshmi's name.

The division bench of Justice SS Sunthar and Justice P Dhanabal passed the order on an appeal preferred by The Music Academy and the Hindu Group. Though a mention was made against the division bench order before the Supreme Court, the CJI directed the matter to be posted on Monday.

Madras High Court Expedites Trial Against Sasikala In FERA Case

Case Title: N Sasikala v The Assistant Director, ED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 478

The Madras High on Thursday dismissed three petitions filed by Sasikala, a close aide of former Tamil Nadu CM J Jayalalithaa, challenging certain questions put forward by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Economic Offences – I at Egmore.

While doing so, the bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice M Jothiraman also directed the court to expedite the trial if the and asked the parties to cooperate with the trial and to refrain from filing frivolous petitions to delay the trial.

The Enforcement Directorate had registered the case in 1996 against Sasikala (as Chairperson and Director of J Jaya TV), V Bhaskaran (Managing Director of Jaya TV), and J Jaya TV Private Limited. The cases were registered under Sections 8(1), 9(1) (c) and 9(1) (a) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act for allegedly making payments to the tune of 10.45 Singapore Dollars, without the RBI's approval, to make payment for transponders and to secure uplinking facilities for the channel.

Freedom Of Speech Not License To Transgress Limits Of Decency: Madras High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To AIADMK Women's Wing Leader

Case Title: Amudha v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 479

Dismissing the anticipatory bail petition filed by AIADMK's State Deputy Secretary of the Women's Wing- Amudha, the Madras High Court highlighted that though the Constitution of India guarantees the fundamental right of speech and expression however this right cannot be taken advantage of to cross the limits of decency.

While doing so, Justice AD Jagadish Chandira also noted that the petitioner had used derogatory statements against the former Chief Minister, present Chief Minister and his family members, uttering "unethical, filthy and unparliamentary" words.

NI Act | College Cannot Be Equated To A Company, Principal Not Vicariously Liable For Signing Cheque: Madras High Court

Case Title: K. Sundari v. C. A. R. P. Mari

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 480

The Madras High Court recently quashed the proceedings initiated against a Principal of a college under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments for signing a cheque that was returned for “insufficient funds”.

While doing so, Justice Anand Venkatesh held that the Principal had not signed the cheque in his individual capacity, and since a college could not be equated to a company, vicarious liability under Section 141 of the Act would not come into effect in the present case.

The court explained that the concept of vicarious liability under Section 141 of the Act could not be applied in cases that did not fall under the ambit of a Company or a Partnership firm. The court noted that the Principal was only an authorised signatory and had signed the cheque in connection with the liability of the college. Thus, the court was inclined to quash the case against the Principal.

Concealment Of Proceeds Of Crime An Offence Under PMLA, ED Need Not Establish Where The Money Eventually Went: Madras High Court

Case Title: KC Chandran and Others v Directorate of Enforcement

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 481

The Madras High Court recently held that since the concealment of proceeds of crime itself is an offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the Enforcement Directorate is not required to establish where the money eventually went.

A division bench of Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice R Poornima added that the accused, who would have engineered the disappearance of the money, could not be exonerated from the charges merely because the proceeds of the crime had not been identified. The court thus underscored that it was enough if the prosecution established the generation of the proceeds of crime and the involvement of the accused in the process.

Hindu Succession Act Doesn't Disqualify Widows From Inheriting Deceased Husband's Property After Remarriage: Madras High Court

Case Title: Malliga (Died) and Others v. S Shanmugam (Died) and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 482

The Madras High Court has observed that there is no provision in the Hindu Succession Act that prohibits a widow from inheriting or taking share in the property of her deceased husband, upon remarriage.

The bench of Justice R Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan noted that though the Hindu Remarriage Act, 1856 disqualified a widow from inheriting properties upon remarriage, this Act was repealed after the Hindu Succession Act came into effect. The bench further noted that as per the Hindu Succession Act, only the widow of a pre-deceased son or widow of a predeceased son of the predeceased son or widow of the brother was disqualified upon remarriage. However, by way of the 2005 amendment, even this provision was repealed.

Madras High Court Calls For SOPs, Practice Directions For Masking Names & Identities Of Victims Of Mental, Emotional And Sexual Harassment

Case Title: The Research Scholar v The Research Guide and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 483

The Madras High Court recently suggested bringing in Standard Operating procedures and Practice Directions to mask the name and identities of every victim of mental, emotional, and sexual harassment in all proceedings.

The bench of Justice CV Karthikeyan and Justice R Poornima observed that observed that the privacy of parties to a litigation should be respected and thus, in the best interest, such directions could be issued. The court suggested that when matters of such nature are filed, a practice direction could be issued ensuring that the name and identity are given in the original copy, which could be retained by the Registry in a sealed cover and the identity could be redacted in all other copies. Further, if there is a challenge to the identity of the party, a reference could be made to the original copy retained in the sealed cover.

Madras High Court Dismisses 2011 Plea To Restrain Retd Justice CS Karnan From Commenting On Judiciary In Media

Case Title: B Stalin v The Registrar Genera, Madras HC and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 484

The Madras High Court recently dismissed a petition filed in 2011 seeking to restrain retired high court judge Justice CS Karnanfrom making public statements, wither written or oral against constitutional authorities or any wing of the judiciary or advocates in public media.

A division bench of Justice MS Ramesh and Justice AD Maria Clete observed that the prayer in the plea south to restrain a sitting Judge of the High Court was impermissible in law.

Noting that the plea had been listed with regard to its maintainability the court said that under Section 3 of the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985, no court shall entertain any proceeding against a Judge for any act thing or word committed, done or spoken by him when, or in the course of, acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official or judicial function.

Madras High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Stabbing Doctor For Alleged Poor Treatment Of Mother

Case Title: Vignesh v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 485

The Madras High Court on Tuesday granted bail to Vignesh, accused of stabbing a doctor at the Kalaignar Centenary Super Speciality Hospital in Guindy, Chennai in November this year.

Considering the period of incarceration, the materials and the arguments, Justice AD Jagadish Chandira was inclined to grant conditional bail to Vignesh. The court thus ordered him to be released upon executing a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties. The court also directed Vignesh to stay at Vellore and report before the Inspector of Police, Sathavachari Police Station every day until further orders.

Thanjavur Schoolgirl Suicide | HC Declines To Quash Abetment Case Against Hostel Warden, Says Religious Conversion Allegations Should've Been Avoided

Case Title: Sr. Sagaya Mary v The State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 486

The Madras High Court has refused to quash the chargesheet filed against Sister Sagaya Mary, hostel warden of St. Michael's Girls Hostel attached to the Sacred Heart Higher Secondary School, Thanjavur for allegedly abetting the suicide of a 12^th Standard Student.

In January 2022, a 12th Standard girl of the Sacred Heart School attempted to commit suicide by consuming pesticide. Though the girl was taken to the hospital, she died during treatment. In her dying declaration, she stated that the hostel warden had tortured her mentally by making her do additional work in the hostel and not allowing her to study properly.

Though the warden contended that she had never intended the child to commit suicide, Justice G Ilangovan of the Madurai bench noted that the warden's intention, whether good or bad, had to be looked into at the time of trial. The court also added that other points raised by the warden also could be considered at the time of trial and the case was not fit to be quashed.

While an attempt was made to bring in a forcible religious conversion angle to the issue, the CBI had ruled out the same. The court appreciated the CBI for bringing out the truth in an honest manner and noted that there was no ground to suspect the allegations of conversion. The court added that the allegations of conversion should have been avoided by those responsible and lamented that the damage already done could not be repaired.

Lenovo Is Exclusive Proprietor Of “THINK” Family Of Marks: Madras HC Orders Removal Of Trademark Registration For “THINBOOK” Laptop

Case Title: Lenovo (Singapore) Pte. Ltd v RPD Workstations Private Limited and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 487

While hearing a plea moved by computer manufacturer Lenovo protection of its "THINK" Family of Marks, the Madras High Court directed the Registrar of Trademarks to cancel the registration given to a Hyderabad based company for its “THINBOOK” mark finding it deceptive.

Justice Abdul Quddhose opined that the petitioner, Lenovo, who had been using the THINK family of marks had obtained a distinctiveness in the field. The court thus ruled that Lenovo was the exclusive proprietor of the mark and continued usage of a similar mark by the respondent company would create confusion in the minds of the people.

The court, on perusing the materials, was convinced that Lenovo had gained a reputation in India and abroad in respect of products – Laptops, Notebooks, iPad etc by using the THINK family of marks. The court added that the respondent company had misrepresented the Registry and the Registry, by total non-application of mind had registered the trademark.

Thus, noting that Lenovo had satisfied the requirements of Section 57 of the Act, the court was inclined to grant the relief and ordered accordingly.

Offence Under PMLA Is Standalone, Can't Have Joint Trial With Predicate Offence Even If Both Are Before Same Court: Madras HC

Case Title: M Venkatesan v Directorate of Enforcement

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 488

The Madras High Court has clarified that the trial under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) is distinct and different from the trial of the predicate offence and thus the accused cannot seek for a simultaneous or joint trial even if both are pending before the same court.

A division bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice M Jothiraman noted that since the procedures contemplated under the PMLA for trial are different, there was no question of joint or simultaneous trial. The court also added that there was no impediment for the special court to continue the trial even if the trial for a predicate offence was pending.

The court noted that as per Explanation (i) to Section 44 of the PMLA, the jurisdiction of the Special Court, while dealing with the offence under the Act shall not be dependent upon any orders passed in respect of the Scheduled offence and the trial in both the sets of offences by the same court shall not be construed as joint trial.

Madras High Court Grants Interim Bail To Temple Activist, Asks Him To Refrain From Making Objectionable Comments Against Women

Case Title: Rangarajan Narasimnhan v State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 489

The Madras High Court has granted bail to temple activist Rangarajan Narasimham for allegedly making derogatory comments against a woman on social media.

While granting interim bail, Justice V Lakshminarayanan asked Narasimham to delete all the offensive messages and refrain from making any vituperative comments against women in any of the social media forums. The court also directed Narasimhan not to commit any similar offences.

Previously, in another case, the High Court had also ordered a two-week 'social media detox' for Narasimhan for his distasteful comments against an industrialist. The court had also imposed a fine on him and commented that protectors of Sanatana Dharma should refrain from using such unsavoury words.

Assets And Liabilities Of Public Servant Cannot Be Shielded From Public Scrutiny, Be Completely Exempted U/S 8 Of RTI Act: Madras High Court

Case Title: M.Tamilselvan v The District Collector and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 490

The Madras High Court recently held that the service register of a public servant could not be completely exempted under Section 8 of the Right to Information Act. Section 8(j) of the RTI Act exempts personal information from disclosure.

Justice CV Karthikeyan observed that the service register of the public servant contains details of the assets and liabilities of the employee which were not private information. The court noted that these details could not be shielded from the public scrutiny. However, the court added that though this information had to be disclosed, there had to be some reasonable restrictions.

The court also added that the materials in the service register had to be scrutinized and if the disclosure is denied, necessary reasons for such denial should be provided.

Madras High Court Suspends Sentence Imposed On BJP's H Raja Over Comments Against Periyar, Kanimozhi

Case Title: H Raja v The State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 491

The Madras High Court on Friday suspended the sentence imposed on BJP's H Raja for his derogatory speech against Periyar and Kanimozhi Karunanidhi. The special court had imposed the sentence on December 2.

Justice L Victoria Gowri suspended the 6-month sentence imposed on him by the Special Court for Trial of Cases Against MLAs/MPs in Chennai The special court had sentenced Raja for the comments made by him in 2018. The orders were passed after the High Court refused to quash the case against him and directed the Special Court to complete the case within 3 months.

Raja had tweeted against EV Ramasamy, popularly known as Periyar saying that the Atheist leader's statues should be broken and also addressing Periyar as a caste fanatic. Raja had also made insensitive remarks against Kanimozhi, calling her the illegitimate child of former TN CM Karunanidhi.

Madras High Court Forms SIT To Investigate The Alleged Sexual Assault Of Student In Anna University, Orders 25 Lakh Interim Compensation To Survivor

Case Title: R Varalakshmi v The Government of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 492

Madras High Court on Saturday (December 28) formed a Special Investigation Team comprising of women IPS officers to investigate into the alleged sexual assault of a 2nd Year Engineering Student inside the Anna Univeristy campus in Chennai earlier on Monday.

A division bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Lakshminarayanan held a special sitting on Saturday and passed the orders on a batch of pleas seeking a CBI probe into the incident. The court said that there were lapses on the part of the police and the University and was thus inclined to form the SIT.

The court also remarked that the leaking of the FIR, containing the personal details of the victim has to be viewed seriously and investigated into. The court said that the FIR leak was a serious lapse on the part of the police which caused trauma for the victim and her family. The court directed the State to pay an interim compensation of Rs. 25 Lakh to the victim girl, which could be recovered from those who were responsible for the dereliction of duty and leaking of the FIR. The court added that the compensation ordered presently, would not prevent the victim from seeking compensation in the criminal cases.