Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: December 16 to December 22, 2024

A weekly round-up of important cases from the Madras High Court Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 479 To 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 488 NOMINAL INDEX Amudha v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 479 K. Sundari v. C. A. R. P. Mari, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 480 KC Chandran and Others v Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 481 Malliga (Died) and Others v. S Shanmugam (Died) and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 482 The Research Scholar v The Research Guide and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 483 B Stalin v The Registrar Genera, Madras HC and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 484 Vignesh v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 485 Sr. Sagaya Mary v The State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 486 Lenovo (Singapore) Pte. Ltd v RPD Workstations Private Limited and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 487 M Venkatesan v Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 488 REPORT 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...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: December 16 to December 22, 2024

Upasana Sajeev

Tags