Madras High Court Monthly Digest: February 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 51 To 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 90NOMINAL INDEX XXXX v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 51 H Santhosh v The District Collector, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 52 Pay Perform India Private Limited v The Union of India and Another, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 53 M/s.India Cements Limited Versus Commissioner of Customs, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 54 Flow Link Systems Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 55 Chairman and Managing Director, UCO Bank v K Marimuthu, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 56 TN Medical Laboratories Association v Principal Secretary and others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 57 SR Sathyanarayana Rao v The District Collector and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 58 E Shakthi Murugan v District Collector, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 59 Madurai Mavatta Devendra Kula Velalar Uravinmurai Sangam v The Secrertary and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 60 M/s.Supreme Paradise Versus Assistant Commissioner (ST), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 61 CPF (INDIA) Private Limited Verses Addl. CIT, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 62 Varun and another v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 63 K Annamalai v V Piyush, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 64 M/s.Thillai Agencies Versus State of Tamil Nadu, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 65 Gopal Vittal, Bharti Airtel Ltd v Kamatci Shankar Arumugam, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 66 S Gurumoorthi v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 67 Nithesh Chaudhari v The Special Director, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 68 Buhari @ Kichan Buhari v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 69 Rajesh Das v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 70 Abhijit Majumder v Inspector of Police and Another, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 71 Tvl. Renault Nissan Automotive India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Joint Commissioner (ST) (FAC), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 72 The Under Secretary to Govt v RK Venkatachalam and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 73 Siva and Others v State and Another, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 74 Dr. Shri Harish v Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 75 (T) CMA (PT) No.88 of 2023 (OA/14/2017/PT/CHN), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 76 G Bhagavath Singh v The Commissioner of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 77 N Ilango v The Chief Secretary, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 78 XYZ v Kalakshetra Foundation and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 79 C Rasu v The Principal Secretary and Commissioner, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 80 Tvl.Transtonelstory Afcons Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CT), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 81 Dharma v Inspector of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 82 The State v I Periyasamy, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 83 Krishapriya Foundation v The Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 84 Union of India v The Deputy Director, UIDAI, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 85 S Lakshmipathy v The State and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 86 V Senthil Balaji v Deputy Director, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 87 ABC v XYZ, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 88 The Secretary to Government and Others v Regina, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 89 Suthendraraja T @ Santhan v The Secretary and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 90 REPORTS Allowing Trial To Continue Without Identifying Accused Would Embarrass & Vilify Victim, Resulting In Mockery Upon Womanhood: Madras HC Quashes Sexual Abuse Case Case Title: XXXX v State Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 51 The Madras High Court recently quashed a sexual harassment case under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act. The court added that since the accused person had not been identified for 3 years, continuing the proceedings would be a mockery upon womanhood and bring further embarrassment to the woman who would be put to mental agony. Justice Anand Venkatesh also lamented that in many sexual abuse cases, not many were willing to come to court and fight against the abuse and even if a few came forward to fight, the system was not very friendly. The court added that in many cases, the victim ended up facing a double whammy by suffering sexual abuse and embarrassment in the court. The court also remarked that this was more of a punishment for the victim. Revenue Authorities Not Empowered To Issue “No Caste, No Religion Certificate”: Madras High Court Case Title: H Santhosh v The District Collector Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 52 The Madras High Court recently observed that while a person could choose not to mention his caste and religion in his documents, the revenue authorities were not empowered to issue a “No Caste No Religion Certificate”. The court observed that issuance of such a certificate will be construed as a general declaration and the Revenue Authorities could not do so in the absence of any powers conferred by the Government. Justice SM Subramaniam added that the Tahsildars could not issue certificates at their whims and fancies and such unguided powers would lead to administrative anarchy and unconstitutionality. While the court appreciated the man's desire to secure such a certificate, the court noted that the government did not confer any powers on the Tahsildar to issue a certificate of such...

Madras High Court Monthly Digest: February 2024

Upasana Sajeev

Tags