Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 09 - February 15, 2026

Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 57 To 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 68 NOMINAL INDEX Pradeep Rajan v. State of Tamil Nadu and Another, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 57 M/s KVN Productions v. Central Board of Film Certification and another, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 58 M/s. Mediaone Global Entertainment Ltd. v M/s. Ad Bureau Advertising Pvt Ltd, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 59 Jawahar Rajan v The Regional Passport Officer and Another, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 60 Mahendra Singh Dhoni v. Zee Media Corporation Limited, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 61 High Court Of Madras v. Ashok Surana, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 62 Railway Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd v. The Appellate Authority and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 63 Bhagavathiraj v. State, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 64 N.Kumar v. District Collector and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 65 Joseph Raja v Inspector of Police, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 66 N Ganesh Agarwal v. The Inspector of Police, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 67 The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department & Ors. v. K. Marimuthu & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 68 REPORT Recovery From Shirt Pocket Is 'Personal Search'; Non-Compliance With Section 50 NDPS Act Vitiates Prosecution: Madras High Court Case Title: Pradeep Rajan v. State of Tamil Nadu and Another Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 57 The Madras High Court recently observed that when a recovery under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act is made from the shirt pocket of the accused, it would be seen as a personal search, and compliance with the statutory mandate under Section 50 of the Act would be mandatory during such a search. Highlighting the importance of following statutory procedure under the Act, Justice Victoria Gowri noted that NDPS prosecutions are not ordinary and the statutory safeguards are not empty formalities but minimum assurance to ensure that the powers were exercised responsibly and legally. Madras High Court Permits 'Jana Nayagan' Movie Producer To Withdraw Plea Against CBFC Case Title: M/s KVN Productions v. Central Board of Film Certification and another Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 58 The Madras High Court on Tuesday (February 10) permitted KVN Productions, producers of Vijay starrer "Jana Nayagan" movie to withdraw their plea challenging the certification process of the Central Board of Film Certification. Justice PT Asha permitted a request made by Vijayan Subramaniam, advocate for the production company. The production company had sent a letter to the High Court registry expressing its intention to withdraw the case. The production company had informed the court that it had decided to go ahead with the review process and thus did not wish to continue with the litigation. Following the letter, the case was posted today under the caption "for withdrawal". Madras High Court Directs Producers Of Kochadaiyaan Movie To Pay ₹2.52 Crore Towards Unpaid Debt Case Title: M/s. Mediaone Global Entertainment Ltd. v M/s. Ad Bureau Advertising Pvt Ltd Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 59 The Madras High Court has directed Mediaone Global Entertainment, the production house engaged in the production of Rajnikanth starrer “Kochadaiyaan” movie, to pay Rs. 2.52 Crore towards unpaid debts. Though Justice Sunder Mohan observed that neither the production house nor the complainant had proved their case under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the court highlighted that the purpose of the law was to compensate the complainant. The court also noted that the alleged cheque was issued in 2014 and the court had to adopt a course to secure ends of justice. Persons Facing Criminal Trial Must Obtain Court's Permission Even For Passport Renewal: Madras High Court Full Bench Case Title: Jawahar Rajan v The Regional Passport Officer and Another Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 60 A full bench of the Madras High Court has clarified that renewal or reissue of a passport should be considered in the same manner as a fresh issue, and prior permission from the court would be necessary in case of pendency of criminal case. The bench of Justice G Jayachandran, Justice S Srimathy, and Justice KK Ramakrishnan was answering a reference made to it by a single judge in view of conflicting decisions by two division benches. The court thus concluded that the restrictions contained in the Act apply not only to fresh applications but also for re-issuance and renewal. The court noted that a person facing criminal proceedings is not absolutely disentitled from getting a passport but it was subject to the permission of the criminal court where the case was pending. IPL Betting Case: Madras High Court Asks Cricketer MS Dhoni To Pay ₹10 Lakh For Translating CDs Involved In His ₹100 Crore Defamation Case Case Title: Mahendra Singh Dhoni v. Zee Media Corporation Limited Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 61 The Madras High Court has asked cricketer...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 09 - February 15, 2026

Upasana Sajeev

Tags